⭐ Merited by d5000 (2)
Satoshi is another Nostradamus, he saw the future. In future, main income of Bitcoin miners will be from transaction fees, not block subsidy.
Nostradamus predicted a future that would not be affected by his own actions, Satoshi designed a thing that will work as that in the future, there is serious difference between those two.
But my worry is that there's also the probability of the opposite of the supercycle - super bear market that could happen if investors and traders get bored of Bitcoin and move on to something different, something completely unrelated to cryptocurrency. With a lot of money leaving the market and no new investments, there good be a very long depression with the price falling down by 80-90%. Essentially it would mean that majority of the Bitcoin market history was a big long bubble, and the bear markets were just corrections of this long mania phase.
For once, I don't think people would dump bitcoin now to 90%!
The perspective has changed and it's no longer perceived as something that can just go out the back door in a matter of seconds, it has earned a solid foothold in the markets, there are people with long term investments that are chasing not just huge revenues but even continuous over the stock market average small gains long-term.
But still not quite a supercycle, more like a chimera of things, cause I don't see with this change huge jumps happening also, when gains will in short periods outpace other investment some will just take those gains and switch to something else, believing and creating themselves tiny cycles of growth and retracements but with an overall direction following stock markets and economic trends.
I was quite the pessimist back last year, I was on the verge of betting that the halving will not do us any good either but after the ETF success (yeah , complete success, not even going to argue here) I don't see anything really bad happening that would bring us back to a linear growth with an under 30k as per November baseline.
Second, I believe the perceived progress in internet technology is also not that significant as it seems, the "progress" here has much more to do with adoption (e.g. in the realm of social media). Facebook or Instagram are technically not that different from a web forum of ca. 1996, it's basically a HTML frontend with a database containing messages and a bit of JavaScript. Of course hardware improvements have made new developments possible or better, like AI and more realistic visual stuff (videogames, ultra HD imagery). In fact, tools like ChatGPT, DALL-E etc. are the only field where I really could see "revolutionary" changes in the last 20-25 years. But in general: the web/tech business models which weren't working in the 90s mainly work now because the Internet is used by the majority of the population, not so much because of technological advancements.
Cryptos did a lot pf piggyback riding on technological advancement.
If people in 1996 out have the same internet as we have now Facebook would have grown in a matter oh months to the behemoth it is today, look at tiktok..
Paypal grew slow because not everyone was buying stuff online, common, how many people here had internet on they phones in 2002?
I'm on the same page as hatshepsut93 on the stagnation, let's be honest other than the price, it for sure hasn't made any progress in things like commerce or even remittance, adoption has turned more to some numbers in a CEX account, and ..that's about all.