Reading Time: 8 minutes
What follows is a brief summary of where the blockchain industry has come from over the past 10 years, where (I think) it’s headed over the next 10 years — and a lens to help understand why. It’s lighter on the deep-history and heavier on the more recent and forward-looking perspective.
Where we’ve come from
Bitcoin Emerges (Jan ‘09)
Bitcoin launches in Jan 2009. Initially, awareness is limited to a small handful of people. Over the next 3 years, Bitcoin receives an increasing amount of media attention — but still very minor relative to what it receives today. 99% of people that hear of Bitcoin dismiss it — and not unjustly.
After all, in its infancy, Bitcoin is still a crazy, far-out idea with implications that are difficult to appreciate. Even most people cognizant of Bitcoin’s potential implications are skeptical — after all, there have been many prior attempts at creating digital, non-sovereign money.
Given the limited track records and limited economic value at stake, it’s easy (and not unreasonable) to dismiss Bitcoin at this point.
Bitcoin hits parity with the USD (Feb ’11) then rallies to $100 (Mar ’13), then $1K (Dec ’13)
The rapid price appreciation quickly shifted the narrative from ‘something that won’t work’ to a comparison to ‘tulips’. Suddenly, pundits were universally ‘reminded’ of an event in the Netherlands that happened 300 years before any of them were alive.
At this point, understanding and appreciation of Bitcoin’s decentralization and resiliency was severely lacking — most pundits simply stated that Bitcoin would clearly be “shut down”. Wrong.
Alongside the rise of Bitcoin was the rise of infamous darknet marketplace ‘The Silk Road’ which lent itself well to a new narrative that “Bitcoin will only be used by criminals”. Wrong again.
Bitcoin “crashes” from $1k to $200, “blockchain not bitcoin” emerges(2014–2016)
Bitcoin skeptics feel vindicated by the price decline: “See, tulips, I told you”, “now that Silk Road is gone, nobody will use Bitcoin”. Wrong again.
Importantly, this led to a major shift in the industry’s narrative to “blockchain not bitcoin”. The idea was to harness the power of the technology without dealing with the digital assets built atop these networks.
Again, not an unreasonable idea for a 101-level understanding — which, admittedly, is nearly everyone at this point in time, even industry insiders. Powerful new technology can be difficult to understand.
This led to a race to ‘blockchain’ all the industries from healthcare to energy.
Bitcoin re-emerges & broader “crypto” steps into limelight (2017)
After 2–3 years of ‘blockchain not bitcoin’ and hundreds of pilots and ‘PoCs’ (Proofs of Concept), ‘blockchain not bitcoin’ implementations failed to bear fruit.
There’s myriad reasons why these efforts failed to generate significant value but, most importantly, three main reasons:
1. Open networks are more powerful than closed networks — see intranets vs the internet
2. The digital assets native to these chains are the critical component that makes these chains functional and useful
3. ‘Private blockchains’ are really a re-hash of database architectures that existed long before Bitcoin — nothing new here
Meanwhile, Bitcoin re-emerges — really, it never went away — but it storms back into public awareness with more users, more transactions, better security, and more supporting infrastructure than ever.
The broader market and industry begins to acknowledge and accept that open networks beat closed networks over time — that public blockchains like Bitcoin that allow anyone to participate and anyone to build atop are the root and core of the blockchain opportunity. People begin to realize and accept that Bitcoin and “crypto” isn’t going away.
This led to a mainstream rush to find and launch a ‘better Bitcoin’. Surely if Bitcoin was the first iteration, we can do much better, right? Again, not an unreasonable idea.
Around this time and in the years following, there was a rush to create new public blockchains that made tradeoffs to optimize for one (or more) particular feature(s). In this period, we saw the launch of chains that optimized for various features such as speed / throughput, privacy, and expressiveness.
Adding fuel to the fire, many of these experiments were funded via ICO which exacerbated the interest in launching experimental chains with different tradeoffs and optimizations. While there were many well-intentioned efforts and a few that had genuinely interesting technical optimizations, most were ill-advised experiments with inferior tradeoffs relative to what already existed in the wild — and because this industry’s complexity demands specialization, it was difficult for most outsiders to separate the wheat from the chaff.
These were all experiments being launched and tested in the wild in an effort to see whether their optimizations would be sufficient to drive traction and, ultimately, surpass Bitcoin in terms of adoption and utility. Each of these chains optimized on one particular front at the expense of another — there is no free lunch here.
New chain tradeoffs / optimizations fail to sufficiently differentiate (2017–2019)
The launch of new chains with different tradeoffs and optimizations marked a battle to become the standard — the base blockchain for the future of programmable money. Too often, industry insiders and outsiders alike focused exclusively on the technical tradeoffs as the leading indicator of potential to be the foundation of programmable money.
Of course, this has proved to be an excessively narrow scope of evaluation — as history has proven repeatedly, standards are rarely determined by “best-tech”.
As it turns out and the market has subsequently validated, Bitcoin was the ‘0 to 1’ moment — the step-function leap in progress. Some newer chains offer minor improvements (going from ‘1 to 1.1’) but most really just make inferior tradeoffs relative to what Bitcoin offers (going from ‘1 to 0.5’).
Overall, in evaluating the probability of any of these chains or coins surpassing Bitcoin two thresholds must be met:
1. ‘Does your set of tradeoffs actually present an improvement over Bitcoin?’ The vast majority — if not all — don’t pass this first test.
2. “Is your ‘improvement’ sufficient to overcome Bitcoin’s network effects, brand, distribution, security and first-mover advantages?” Despite myriad optimization experiments, no chain has successfully offered a sufficiently compelling advantage to overcome Bitcoin’s established (and rapidly expanding) network effects, brand, distribution and security.
As a result, most of these new chains — many of which feature a shiny new “breakthrough” consensus algorithm — are the equivalent of Chinese ghost cities: Seemingly beautiful designs and construction that lack organic demand.
Where we’re going
From lateral competition to vertical construction
While the prior period marked a lateral battle to become the foundation underpinning the future of programmable money, the market will continue to coalesce around 1 (or, at most, a couple) winning protocol(s).
Overall, even inside industry participants drastically over-weighted the probability that a new chain would surpass Bitcoin.
In reality, it’s not an even race: Bitcoin has a massively disproportionate probability of taking the lion’s share of the market over the next 10 years. Nobody cares about the 2nd best email protocol after SMTP.
This is a winner takes most market and Bitcoin is the far and away leader — by any metric.
Why? Bitcoin has more users, more value at stake, more awareness, more onramps, the best supporting infrastructure and, arguably, the most prudent set of ‘tradeoffs’ in the public blockchain landscape (one that emphasizes security, long-term scalability, and perfectly predictable monetary policy).
To make matters even more challenging for competing chains, securities regulators in the US and elsewhere have made it clear that fundraising and launching a new chain/coin is a legally dubious proposition — giving Bitcoin somewhat of a (unnecessary) regulatory moat.
Bitcoin’s dominant position is reflected in the sampling of charts below — there’s many more that could be added that effectively all tell the same story. In a winner takes most market with first-mover advantages and network effects, it’s objectively difficult and far-fetched to imagine any of the competing chains surpassing Bitcoin at this point.
In short, Bitcoin has already come a long way from its humble beginnings: Only six years ago, few people had even heard of Bitcoin —and even those who had largely regarded the fledgling digital asset as a“tulip phenomenon”.
In contrast, as of Spring 2019, 89% of the American population has at least heard of Bitcoin and the younger generations are diving in head-first: Among those aged 18–34, 60% are familiar with Bitcoin, 59% see Bitcoin as ‘a positive innovation in financial technology’, 48% think it’s ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ likely that ‘most people will be using Bitcoin in the next 10 years’,and 42% say they’re ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ likely to buy Bitcoin in the next 5 years. (source: https://medium.com/blockchain-capital-blog/bitcoin-is-a-demographic-mega-trend-data-analysis-160d2f7731e5)
So where do we go from here?
From here, the building begins in earnest.
That’s not to denigrate the engineering efforts behind all of the new chains that have launched but to emphasize that this next phase of building will produce the layers, protocols, applications and services that will actually be used over the next decade — in contrast to the vast majority of chains which don’t see any meaningful economic traction (“ghost cities”).
Development and building activity will shift from launching insufficiently differentiated new chains to improving and building “up the stack” of the winning protocols.
In many ways, this phase is already well under-way: the Lightning network is a 2nd-layer/protocol built atop the Bitcoin network that facilitates fast, cheap, peer-to-peer Bitcoin transactions. Similarly, there’s several dozen (if not hundreds) of companies and developers that have built infrastructure, applications and services for Bitcoin.
As this vertical construction plays out we will continue to see more supporting infrastructure emerge as well as a lush and diverse ecosystem of applications and services emerge that facilitate a wide range of functionality for Bitcoin as programmable money. This industry began with a financial asset (Bitcoin) and financial infrastructure (the Bitcoin blockchain) and in the years ahead will continue to find the most utility in the realm of (non-sovereign) programmable money.
Importantly, this transition will take years to play out: We’re still in the onboarding phase of Bitcoin — which is why exchanges have been the most profitable crypto companies to-date, much like how ISPs were the most profitable internet companies in its early days.
Of course, these phases aren’t strictly sequential: While we’re only in the first or second-inning of the onboarding phase, the Bitcoin stack and the applications and services that it supports will emerge concurrently and accelerate the onboarding phase.
Bitcoin has and will continue to undergo many ‘phase transitions’ in the years ahead. Namely, Bitcoin will continue to transition from a volatile and speculative commodity — which is how it is (not unjustly) viewed today — to broader recognition as the empowering foundation of programmable money.
A new dynamic at play
There’s an important dynamic at play as the Bitcoin stack emerges: Changes to the base-layer are intentionally slow*, deliberate and careful — there’s no ‘playful tinkering’ when there’s $100B+ of value at stake. As such, changes to the Bitcoin protocol itself require network-wide consensus from (nearly) all key economic stakeholders.
In contrast, building up the Bitcoin stack has a different dynamic: developers can innovate and iterate quickly because these are opt-in protocols, layers, applications and services that don’t put the underlying network at risk and don’t require network-wide consensus. For example, the lightning network could suffer a catastrophic failure and the Bitcoin network would continue functioning as intended.
By design, Bitcoin itself is difficult to change but anyone can freely build and innovate atop the network. So while its intentionally challenging and tedious to make changes to the Bitcoin protocol itself, the pace and range of innovation up the stack will be considerably faster and more expansive.
The rough analogy here is that making changes to a jet engine mid-flight necessitates extreme caution — but there’s little risk in designing a new in-flight entertainment system. Indeed, once a base-level of flight safety is assured, an improved in-flight experience that’s more comfortable with better entertainment and fresh food increases the appeal of flying.
Similarly, as people get more comfortable with Bitcoin itself, augmented functionality up the stack will drive broader adoption.
Ultimately, as Bitcoin charges ahead, it offers fertile ground for vertical growth. As industry venture investors, we look forward to the next decade of investing in the infrastructure, applications and services that enable people to unlock the power of natively digital programmable money.
*“slow” here is relative to the pace of innovation that many have become accustomed to in software. In reality, given the stakes, Bitcoin’s development has been far from slow
Buyer of Jack Dorsey’s ‘genesis tweet NFT’ reportedly detained in Iran
Iranian Cyber Police have reportedly arrested Bridge Oracle CEO Sina Estavi, according to a tweet pinned to Estavi’s Twitter account.
A rough translation of the tweet reads:
“The owner of this account was arrested on charges of disrupting the economic system by order of Special Court for Economic Crimes. Official judicial authorities will provide additional information.”
The same tweet is also pinned to the official account of Bridge Oracle, a Tron Network-based public oracle system. At the time of writing, the price of Bridge Oracle’s native token, BRG, has taken a sharp dive, crashing by more than 65%, according to data from TradingView.
Bridge Oracle is said to be a Malaysia-based blockchain company, but Estavi’s other venture, cryptocurrency exchange Cryptoland, was operating in Iran. Cryptoland’s Twitter account shares the same pinned tweet. No further information was shared publicly by the authorities.
Estavi is known for his heated bidding battle with tech entrepreneur and Tron CEO Justin Sun to buy Jack Dorsey’s first-ever tweet as an NFT. Twitter’s first tweet is dated March 2006 and reads, “Just setting up my twttr.”
In the end, Estavi successfully purchased the NFT for more than $2.9 million, or 1,630 Ether (ETH). Dorsey converted the proceeds to Bitcoin (BTC) and donated them to a charity organization in Africa.
Earlier this year, Estavi was sued by former Bitcoin.com CEO Mate Tokay for allegedly failing to pay him for his services. In his claim, Tokay also alleged that there’s an inconsistency between the purported and actual circulating supply of BRG.
Cointelegraph reached out to Bridge Oracle for comment. This article will be updated should they reply.
Bank of America to Settle Stock Trades on Paxos Network
The information on or accessed through this website is obtained from independent sources we believe to be accurate and reliable, but Decentral Media, Inc. makes no representation or warranty as to the timeliness, completeness, or accuracy of any information on or accessed through this website. Decentral Media, Inc. is not an investment advisor. We do not give personalized investment advice or other financial advice. The information on this website is subject to change without notice. Some or all of the information on this website may become outdated, or it may be or become incomplete or inaccurate. We may, but are not obligated to, update any outdated, incomplete, or inaccurate information.
You should never make an investment decision on an ICO, IEO, or other investment based on the information on this website, and you should never interpret or otherwise rely on any of the information on this website as investment advice. We strongly recommend that you consult a licensed investment advisor or other qualified financial professional if you are seeking investment advice on an ICO, IEO, or other investment. We do not accept compensation in any form for analyzing or reporting on any ICO, IEO, cryptocurrency, currency, tokenized sales, securities, or commodities.
Is Bitcoin nearing another Black Thursday crash? Here’s what BTC derivatives suggest
Bitcoin’s 51.4% crash in March 2020 was the most horrific 24-hour black swan event in the digital asset’s history. The recent price activity of the past week has probably resurrected similar emotions for investors who experienced the Black Thursday crash.
Over the past week, Bitcoin’s (BTC) price dropped 29% to reach a three-month low at $42,150. $5.5 billion in long contracts were liquidated, which is undoubtedly a record-high in absolute terms. Still, the impact of the March 2020 crash on derivatives was orders of magnitude higher.
To understand why the current correction is less severe than the one in March 2020, we will start by analyzing the perpetual futures premium. These contracts, also known as inverse swaps, face an adjustment every eight hours, so any price gap with traditional spot markets can be easily arbitrated.
Sometimes, price discrepancies arise during moments of panic due to concerns about the derivatives exchange’s liquidity or market makers being unable to participate during times of extreme volatility.
On March 12, 2020, the Bitcoin perpetual futures initiated a much larger descent than the price on spot exchanges. This move is partially explained by the cascading liquidations that took place, creating a backlog of large sell orders unable to find liquidity at reasonable prices.
The aftermath of the bloodbath resulted in futures perpetual contracts trading at a 12% discount versus regular spot exchanges. BitMEX, the largest derivatives market at the time, went offline for 25 minutes, causing havoc as investors became suspicious about its liquidity conditions.
By comparing this event with the most recent week, one will find that sustainable price discrepancies are very unusual. Even a temporary 12% gap doesn’t occur, even during the most volatile hours.
Take notice of how the perpetual contracts reached a peak 4% discount versus regular spot exchanges on May 13, although it lasted less than five minutes. Market makers and arbitrage desks could have been caught off guard but quickly managed to recoup liquidity by buying the perpetual contracts at a discount.
To understand the impact of those crashes on professional traders, the 25% delta skew is the best metric, as it compares similar call (buy) and put (sell) options’ pricing. When market makers and whales fear that Bitcoin’s price could crash, they demand a higher premium for the neutral-to-bearish put options. This movement causes the 25% delta skew to shift positively.
The above chart displays the mind-blowing 59% peak one-month Bitcoin options delta skew in March 2020. This data shows absolute fear and an incapacity to price the put (sell) options, causing the distortion. Even if one excludes the intraday peak, the 25% delta skew presented sustained periods above 20, indicating extreme “fear.”
Over the past week, the skew indicator peaked at 14%, which isn’t very far from the “neutral” -10% to +10% range. It is indeed a striking difference from the previous months’ negative skew, indicating optimism, but nothing out of the ordinary.
Therefore, although the recent 29% price drop in seven days could have been devastating for traders using leverage, the overall impact on derivatives has been modest.
This data shows that the market has been incredibly resilient as of late, but this strength might be tested if Bitcoin’s price continues to drop.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision.
dotmoovs Raises $840,000 From Strategic Investors and Partners
US Investment Bank Cowen to Offer Crypto Custody Services
Ethernity Chain Immortalizes Tony Hawk’s Last 540 Skate Trick With NFT
Buterin Plugs UNI as Next Oracle Token
Which ‘green’ cryptocurrency is Tesla likely to add for payments?
Bitwise Launches ‘Crypto Innovators’ ETF
Elon Musk Pokes Massive Hole in the Bitcoin Market After Halting Bitcoin Payments at Tesla
BitMEX Executives to Face Trial in March 2022
Facebook’s Diem Enters Crypto Space With Diem USD Stablecoin
Venture platform Cognitive Blockchain invests in cross-chain compute network Cudos
Ethernity Chain Memorializes Tony Hawk’s Latest 540 Skate Trick With NFT
Vitalik Buterin Dumps His SHIB, Price Tanks 30% In 1 Hour
The STC Token is Live – And Over 10 Crypto Exchanges are Ready for It
Diem parters with Silvergate bank to launch stablecoin in the US
DeFi Staple UMA Launches “Optimistic Oracle”
MicroStrategy Buys Another $15M Worth of Bitcoin at $55K
In Less than A Week, How Internet Computer (ICP) Climbed To The Top 10
Here’s why Ethereum, AAVE, ALPHA are unfazed by Bitcoin’s latest ‘Elon candle’
Vitalik Buterin Has Dumped His Unsolicited Doge-Clones
Central Bank of Bahrain and JPMorgan to work on digital currency settlement pilot
Blockchain1 week ago
Crypto Market Cap Added $300B in 7 Days as Altcoins Explode: The Weekly Recap
Blockchain6 days ago
Palantir Accepts Bitcoin for Payments and Considers Adding BTC to Balance Sheet
Blockchain1 week ago
Ray Dalio’s Bridgewater CFO leaves to work on Bitcoin full-time
Blockchain1 week ago
Ethereum price closes in on $4K as Shiba Inu (SHIB) steals Dogecoin’s thunder
Blockchain1 week ago
CFO of World’s Largest Hedge Fund Joins Institutional Bitcoin Firm NYDIG
Blockchain1 week ago
Ethereum (ETH) Hits $3800 ATH As Coinbase Premium Shoots With Institutional Interest
Blockchain1 week ago
Crypto Banter Will Give Away Over $500K To 10 Eligible Community Members
Blockchain1 week ago
Legendary Pelé NFT Set to Drop on Ethernity May 8