Topic: Eth being sold to buy Sol - meanwhile BTC keep winning... - page 2. (Read 674 times)

I see most of the sentiment on this thread are widely around ETH not making it in this bull run. A lot of other eth holders share the same concerns and just when we thought eth was done for, the price started going back up. Solana has always been a top performer with plenty of room for growth while ETH has a relatively largely MC which means it is much harder to push very solana where a few billions means a lot.

ETH isn't going anywhere
Bitcoin will remain king
Solana will strive as long as their foundation keep subsidizing tx fee costs.

Infinite sum games guys.

The altcoin market is very competitive and hard to predict anything, ETH may be king for a long time but it is not irreplaceable but I think Solana is not a candidate to replace ETH. Look at the Solana chain, other than the development of Memecoin to attract cash flow, nothing is outstanding.


ETH is quite stagnant and Sol is emerging as a star but if we pay attention, the altcoin market relies on the performance of the ETH/BTC pair to decide the trend. The altcoin market remains stagnant as ETH fails to break out but things are looking better as ETH has broken above $3k. I believe this is a good sign for altcoins in the coming time and once again it proves that ETH is still the king of altcoins.

Me too, I still appreciate and believe in ETH more than solana. What will be the future of solana after this cycle when they have nothing but memecoin?

I think you’re right it think Solana is devaluing ETH because of this trade off and I have even thought about it myself but I don’t think that ETH is over or done for by any means. It’s so engrained in so much and I just don’t see it ever being completely abandoned. SOL though is emerging and for now might be a good play in the short term but long term I think I am more set on ETH

Though I am not a fan or investor of altcoin or shitcoin but I wouldn't speculate that eth will collapse because in cryto world, no body can fully predict wether coin A will outperform coin B. Despite the slow movement of eth, I still believe it to be the subsidiary of bitcoin because it has a high market cap seconding bitcoin. and also the second altcoin to have a reasonable amount alongside bitcoin. Apart from bitcoin most people preferably chose eth because it is more safe and secure than any other alt. It's growth is seconded by bitcoin because it grows slowly like bitcoin. I believe that if bitcoin grows drastically it will take the Leed. Bitcoin is x30+ that of eth, so for eth to increase tons reasonable price BTC being the father will have to make a push for eth to follow.

Eth today hit yet another 3 year record low to BTC. What an absolute disaster for anyone hoping to outperform BTC with an alt.

Well, with respect, people need to understand that whilst some traders "make more money trading altcoins compared to Bitcoin", overall more traders in total lose money trading altcoins compared to Bitcoin. Its a mugs game. The "winners" in the alt coin game are primarily those who launch such coins - and guess what they do - they buy Bitcoin!

But yes, there will always be a new fool who believes they can consistently outperform BTC with alts. Most sadly need to learn their lesson the hard way. But I agree, if we can educate them in advance then we all benefit (other then the shicoin founders).

You need to understand that many traders make more money trading altcoins compared to Bitcoin that is hard to manipulate. Manipulation in the market makes many of these altcoins projects to be easy to trade without much technical analysis. This is not Forex Marketplace where a trader would have to keep reading charts to understand what price could be capable of doing so they can position their trades. Bitcoin can not be compared to altcoins including Ethereum and it's high time we start to think smartly so that we don't have to keep making mistakes of seeing altcoins doing better tna Bitcoin just like you have said. Bitcoin still remains my favorite cryptocurrency in the market.

Yes, LTC founder dumped all his coins at the peak of the market. Actually it turned out to be the peak because when people heard about his decision they panicked and sold, ending the bull run prematurely.
He claimed that he did it so that he wouldn't be accused of pumping the coin for his own benefit, but that's what he was doing and that's what he did at the end. He sold at the peak of the pump that he took part in. Then, probably because he was afraid of being sued for it, he donated most of the profits.

Here's an article from 2018

“People lose money and they want someone to blame,” Lee said in an interview Tuesday. “And they think for some reason I had inside information, and that’s silly. At the time when I sold, everyone thought it would go to $1,000.”

Lee announced his decision on Dec. 20, 2017, a day after the token reached a record high of about $375. It’s been falling ever since, and is now trading at about $30. The sale was done via several trades at an average price of about $200, he said.

https://www.livemint.com/Money/Ryp8lvHyp2wIQU5rMwm9KK/A-year-after-Litecoin-founder-sold-most-of-his-crypto-holdin.html

Re "There are lots of alts, big ones with potential, however, the ETH stands proudly above them. Even with all of its flaws and technicalities which were mentioned above and much more throughout the threads."

Eth may stand proudly above other alts. But it time, it seems to be shrinking in status among alts, being viewed as old, stale, directionless, and a jack of all trades but master of none. We certainly see this in the relative decline of ETH in value and % of total alt market cap over the last 3 years. Reality is, in terms of price, speculators have moved on...

There are lots of alts, big ones with potential, however, the ETH stands proudly above them.
Even with all of its flaws and technicalities which were mentioned above and much more throughout the threads.

I really agree with your opinion which states that Ethereum is an alternative that is always closely related to Bitcoin. In a few days, the increase in Bitcoin has not had a big effect on the price of Ethereum. Currently, Bitcoin's movement continues to peak. Everyone says Bitcoin is the number 1 coin in the crypto world and vice versa.
I still believe that Ethereum has good potential for the future and will not be the same as other niche coins that we cannot rely on in the long term, whereas Ethereum already has strong financial standing in the market among the most popular altcoins after Bitcoin.

Did the founders of LTC cash out previously? Didn't hear about it.

I totally understand why Ethereum is being called an alternative to Bitcoin, but in reality, ETH isn't a true alternative to BTC. ETH is too different than BTC and fits another niche in the crypto world. A pump-and-dump shitcoin, whose price goes up by 1000% overnight definitely "outperforms" Bitcoin, but such achievement is totally fake, because the shitcoin cannot sustain that artificially pumped price.
Anyways, BTC is having a bull run right now and everyone is making posts about how "Bitcoin is king". When the BTC price inevitably crashes, everyone will suddenly start complaining about Bitcoin. We've seen this before and it will happen again.

In some ways, Eth was a scam from the outset, trying to create a "Better than BTC" Bitcoin, with additional features, and trying to steal value from BTC into the scheme. This plan succeeded initially, due to human's innate gread, lack of knowledge of economics, and innate curiosity. However, that how now reversed, as a portion of that investor group wised up and moved to BTC, and another portion were disloyal from the outset and chased the next hot thing being Sol or whatever. Either way, Eth is now in a tough spot as money continues to drain out.

For the same reason shitcoiners do it. Why did Do Kwon do it? Why did SBF scam people?

The way I see it, the goal of ETH was to become the most popular cryptocurrency. From the start they wanted to make a better bitcoin. A cryptocurrency that can be mined, but also allow others to launch shitcoins on its chain. It was supposed to be a coin of opportunities and a coin for building. If that eventually fails this will most likely lead to devs leaving the project, just like Hoskinson did years ago.
As enough people abandon ETH, founders will cash out whats left and move on.
Hasn't that happened before? Just look at LTC. 

Blockchain with a proof-of-work consensus algorithm is, first of all, a digital currency. People need decentralized money, which is why Bitcoin has become a mega-popular project.

A decentralized global computer (the original positioning of Ethereum) turned out to be unnecessary for most people. People are not smart enough for such a computer, they are satisfied with a laptop and a smartphone. In addition, governments of all countries are more or less tolerant of various centralized operating systems, centralized app stores, etc.

However, a decentralized operating system and a decentralized app store are not what governments and intelligence agencies want to see. This is too powerful an entity.

Perhaps (by the way), in the near future, artificial intelligence will learn to use this entity (for example, to create monetizable content and independently purchase computing power and electricity).

I think I get what you mean but I meant something different with "real world problems". The "real world problems" I was talking about are, imo, necessities of people which are not related to the cryptocurrency sector. They can exist even in the virtual space, but they are real necessities.

"Transferring value without being censored" is such a "real world" necessity which Bitcoin solves, even if the transaction itself occurs in the "virtual world". My favourite example is an opposition movement in an authoritarian country. They need funding for their activities, and Bitcoin can provide an electronic means if the banks are denying an account.

Or take a stateless person who doesn't get a bank account anywhere and wants to save some money.

On Ethereum at the start there were some projects which looked interesting at a first glance. For example there was some kind of trust which allowed to pool people together to finance projects, and basically they were promoting it as an alternative to a bank credit and/or insurance-style services. I think it was this one (Wetrust Platform). The market for such a platform should be enormous if it works. However, I never heard anything from this project again. My guess is that people learnt to game the DAO of the project, or that it was simply a scam, and I have had also doubt such a community can work.

ICO tokens to finance a startup, on the other hand, is a solution for a real world problem where Ethereum did work a bit. But ... you don't need a Turing complete scripting language for that. Coloured coins can do that trick on Bitcoin, LTC and friends since 2013 or so. Idem centralized stablecoins like Tether (which started on BTC). And the enormous amount of scams and rugpulls didn't really favour it as a platform for "serious" startups, above all outside the crypto sector.

Thus the problem for Ethereum is: how can it justify its Turing complete language which makes everything much more complex, but provides little solutions for "real world" problems?

Why would they do it, though? 

I just don't think cryptocurrencies can solve real world problems. The real world is run by completely different people (people using 20th century social technologies, not 21st century ones).

The virtual and real worlds are different kinds of worlds. In the real world, everything is based on laws and regulations. In the real world, it is very difficult to take an action if it contradicts the law (and it is completely impossible to take an action if it contradicts the physical world).

In the virtual world, you can take any action if it does not contradict the program code (which can be changed quite easily if necessary). It is certainly possible to take actions in the virtual world that are simultaneously consistent with the code and laws created by the elites of the real world, but it is essentially meaningless. Such actions will essentially be no better than the actions you can take in the real world.

How, for example, are real world stocks worse than digital tokenization of assets? No better ...

This is why it is impossible to create an ideal application on Ethereum for the real world.  Bitcoin has such enormous value precisely because it uses real-world resources for the task of transferring value exclusively in the virtual world. Bitcoin, in a way, says to people - "I don't care about you and your real world." And people say to Bitcoin - "This is exactly why we are interested in you!"

I agree fully, well said.

And that's also exactly the problem I have with Ethereum, so I don't understand why you on the other hand don't insist on a "killer app".

Bitcoin, as a value transfer tool, has characteristics no other medium of exchange can provide, like its strong censorship resistance. While other altcoins provide that too, none is as secure as BTC.

Ethereum positions itself as an application platform. That's completely okay. The problem is with the applications themselves. They should solve a real world problem. And that's where I think most Ethereum projects are failing. They are creating solutions in the virtual space which are not related to a problem in the real world. Not even in a "virtual world" outside of the crypto space.

There are very few exceptions, I think for example that Dai is really an interesting project, even if I wished it would be even more decentralized. But most other projects are basically marketplaces either of cryptocurrencies or tokens (which is why I wrote about the "circlejerk" problem) of "some virtual data entity", like AI agents. These marketplaces normally don't really need a blockchain to function.

Yep, exactly.