Topic: Bitcoin ETFs - Good or Bad? (Read 736 times)

Yes, if you take precautions you can be safe for some purchases, but if buy, say, a house or a car, which necessarily has your name on it, then people can trace backwards to find you, and then extrapolate other purchases etc.

For GMail, on the hand, you don't have to be careful, you just use it and nobody without a court order is going to be reading your email.

And yeah, I guess if we're talking about one's spouse, that's probably correct, but if we're talking about malign actors e.g. people looking to steal something from you, spending without taking precautions with Bitcoin can get you ripped off, whereas you can email your brains out with GMail and never have to fear such a thing.

For the average user not accustomed to tradecraft, a centralized app from a reputable company is a better bet than Bitcoin or most other cryptos (obviously not the ones specially designed for anonymity like Monero).

And for most people who are not criminals, the kind of anonymity you get from centralized apps is perfectly fine.

Of course if we're talking about credit card purchases (or PayPal et. al.) then it's is a totally different story. Your purchases are practically announced to the whole world with that because they sell non-anonymized marketing data to whomever wants to buy it.

What somebody needs to do is marry these two concepts wherein you can make payments anonymously with a centralized digital currency architecture that doesn't sell your data (and doesn't even know who you are), allowing average consumers to make anonymous payments and yet not be a security threat by allowing criminals a means of extra-legal payment. 

people couldn't resist that's why they pushed for that ETF but the negative effect will come in the long term. we\re happy ffor the approval though.
there were posts weeks ago that a pool tried sensor transactions which i wouldn't be surprised if it was the institutions who influenced them to do it since they are also investing in the stocks of these mining companies.

Whitney Webb a renowned journalist has been discussing BlackRock's agenda for BTC for a while and she said it started since the plan to censor the internet.

Triangulated? Your Bitcoin transactions are as private as your pseudonym under an Internet page, with the exception that transactions don't have an IP address. If you take precautions, it can be pretty private.

I'd argue that if you just want to hide yourself from your spouse, both are equally private. (Unless your spouse works for the NSA, lol)

The question here is rather whether you want to profit from the Bitcoin price, in which case an ETF is the right option for people who are not confident in dealing with physical Bitcoins. But if you see Bitcoin as an alternative to the currency system and are more ideologically motivated to invest in Bitcoin, then I agree with you that an ETF is the wrong option.

I think that without a Bitcoin ETF, the process of investing in Bitcoin may be slightly more complex for traditional investors who are accustomed to investing through regulated financial instruments like ETFs. They would need to navigate the world of cryptocurrency exchanges, wallets, and private keys.
However, it's worth mentioning that even without a Bitcoin ETF, there are already alternative investment products available in the market that provide exposure to Bitcoin. For example, there are Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) and other similar investment trusts that allow investors to indirectly invest in Bitcoin

The argument that bitcoin is used by all kind of shady people will remain, it is just that now it will change and instead they will portray themselves as the good guys and make the argument that anyone that is outside of their sphere of influence should be the subject of greater scrutiny, so not much is going to change on that regard, the only thing that it will change is that we will see even more money coming to this market, and as a result the price of bitcoin should reach higher levels than what we expected before.

Regarding these two specific points I would say that bitcoin has been used as a speculative asset since the very beginning, not everybody was interested in using it as currency, so this is an old story, the ETFs are not going to make any difference. And it's the same for the big funds buying bitcoin, if they are buying is because some people want to make money out of it, whoever wants to use it to be independent can keep doing it, it won't become centralized.

definitely, privacy is compromised into this type of investment. however, it depends on the investor if he will comply with such requirements. this ETF on the other hand, provides a good avenue for public to learn more about this digital market. as previously viewed as being used only by illegal actors, now with the introduction of crypto-related ETFs, the notion to this market in my opinion is changing. so whether this one is not good for hard core crypto users because they don't want to compromise their privacy, this on the other hand, is good for crypto adoption. because previously noncrypto users will now have more confidence in looking at this market.

Most consumers don't have any practical way of getting at their private key (if there even is one associated with their account), and the entire point of decentralization is lost. This is like saying you can melt down your GOLD ETF and make some jewelry.

But I never said that Bitcoin has no purpose, only that much of its original vision did not pan out. Clearly Bitcoin serves a purpose, and investors agree.


If somebody within Google read people's email, they would be prosecuted (talking here about reading it in the way that most would care, e.g. your specific emails to get at your own personal messages for a specific purpose). Put it this way, for all practical purposes, if you are not breaking the law, your GMail is more private than your Bitcoin transactions. If you send an email with GMail that you don't want your spouse to know about, you are safe, for instance. With Bitcoin that is a lot harder, and far out of reach for most consumers.

But it's still important to have the ability to do so even if many don't feel a need to. If somehow that gets taken away and all that's left is exchanging on centralised platforms, Bitcoin will lose any purpose.


Bitcoin is pseudonymous (don't be confused with pseudo-anonymous), meaning your public keys/addresses are your pseudonym, and it's up to you to take precautions of whether to connect your real identity with the pseudonym or not. So it can be private but doesn't have to.

As for Google account - they can be accessed by Google themselves if they choose to, so not much privacy there.

Most investors don't hold their own keys anyhow, so this won't make a difference for most people.

It's no different than using Coinbase or Binance or some other wallet app.

And a public ledger is not very... private. My GMail account is more private than Bitcoin because at least there would need to be a valid court order to breach my private email messages. Bitcoin transactions can be triangulated by anybody on the Internet.

Sure, but they have a lot of other benefits. Obviously those who prefer to hold shares in an ETF are not bothered about hiding their holdings from regulators/government entities. Quite the opposite, it's probably much easier to keep track of your buy/sell orders for tax purposes than doing so with private transactions.
Again, ETFs are just tools we can use but don't have to. As long as the option to transact directly and anonymously on-chain is not restricted, I see no problem here.

ETFs, like stocks, follow strict rules. They need personal details (KYC) from everyone, so using them removes the privacy that comes with cryptocurrencies.

ETF has nothing to do with decentralization, stay away.

Yes, this is common in every huge news or event happening in the market, so for me, the best thing to do is to wait. Wait for the price to stabilize again. If we assume that the buy the rumor and sell the news is happening then we can be assured it will not stay longer because people just trying to manipulate the market and make money on it.
I don't think any of the ETF things happened affecting the price of Bitcoin recently.

If we exclude all news about Bitcoin Spot ETFs and only use price chart, we will see it is predictive to have corrections for Bitcoin around $40,000 to $45,000. The spike to $49,000 did not last too long and is not important. Finally price has been pulling back with an on-going correction.

Now, includes Bitcoin Spot ETF news, buy the rumor, sell the news is true but after this effect completes its role, we will have good capital contribution from Bitcoin Spot ETF. Money flow is important for any market and we will have massive capital with Spot ETFs.

$200,000 is possible but $600,000 is too much and it will be impossible within next 20 months. It can be a Bitcoin price in next 8 to 12 years, not next 20 months.

I see them as mostly good long term, but in the short term there has always been potential for bad.  For example, it was always going to be a buy the rumor sell the news moment, and that's exactly what we've seen.  However, they are sucking up BTC at a pretty huge rate and when the halving occurs and BTC is distributed from hacks and everything else, the amount of buying power being thrown at a limited asset will be more than the market can take.  I did a little number crunching myself last night and came up with a $600,000 BTC price in 20 months.  Higher than any prediction I've ever made, but my ultimate prediction of a $200,000 BTC in the future feels like it is a matter of months away now (maybe 20).

ETFs are benefical to raise Bitcoin adoption among investors who can't take risks on their own, therefore they seek for middleman services in order to invest. This is the bright side of those funds, although I don't like the idea of concentrating high sums of money on centralized funds. It gives too much power to few individuals on the top positions of financial world, what in theory is the opposite of what Bitcoin proposed to bring to us.

One of the worst aspects of that, is the fact ETFs can be used to manipulate the market, leading coordinated massive sales of BTC, dumping the price and then pumping it again later. If the market were mainly composed by autonomous investors, this kind of market manipulation would be harder to practice.

Anyway, there isn't anything we can do about it. People look for centralization and regulations as a way to feel safer against the risks of a decentralized system, such as hacks, scams and personal mistakes when transacting online. We can't force people to invest by themselves and we can't forbid ETFs to exist. I don't think ETF is the knight on the white horse, although at same time I don't think it's one of the knights of the apocalypse. It has its pros and cons.

The idea that governments can take some money from you, makes them so greedy, if they can find anything that they can take money from you, they will accept it. People assumed that bitcoin would not be loved by governments, even hated, but they missed the fact that if you tell the government that they can tax your bitcoin income, they will be madly in love with it, and that's what we are seeing right now.

I hope that it can go that way, I don't care if I have to pay taxes, it's fine by me, I just have to realize that we are going to end up with something that will benefit everyone, and that should not be an issue. I know that it's going to be a bit of a difficult thing to handle, but it will be as simple as it gets.

They are not completely sincere in buying Bitcoin with their support for the technology in Bitcoin, but it is more likely to prioritize their personal interests. We can see that they will later buy bitcoin as if other people should also buy it. Then some manipulative news will appear and try to make price movements as desired by investors.

The Bitcoin market is still not mature enough, so it is natural that this could be something that is vulnerable to speculation. For ordinary people who only understand how to make money with Bitcoin, perhaps large adoption from several large institutions could be a solution for them. But we ourselves must understand that we do not know the true purpose of what large institutions do.

It could be that we are the real victims.

I can't answer that Bitcoin's movement to ETFs is the right movement.