Event

BITCOIN halving – ANY DIFFERENT FROM MONEY ? – free content

Bitcoin, as being the first of the now many virtual currencies meanwhile offered, started quietly and was hardly recognized – in or around 2008. The history of the “coin” reads like a combination between techno Robin Hood and some modern day fable. Up to this day it is unclear who the person or organization behind the electronic currency is. These days there seems to be a lot of conflicting information and almost as usual even conspiracies behind the creators and their motivation.

Definition as by investorpedia.com – “Bitcoin offers an efficient means of transferring money over the internet and is controlled by a decentralized network with a transparent set of rules, thus presenting an alternative to central bank-controlled fiat money.”

The name you read most about being connected with its creation is Satoshi Nakamoto, who apparently does not exist. The person, who many believe to be the man behind Bitcoin, Dorian Nakamoto, consistently denies being the creator. Over time, many tried to claim its fame, but were never confirmed of being the legitimate master(s) of its creation. 

The exact time and place Bitcoin surfaced for the first time is unavailable. Without those parameters an attempt to characterize the event will be a mere guess. As it seems, everything around Bitcoin is a bit controversial and “techno mystical”.

Searching for hints and dates, I came across an article by Zeynep Özlem Yalçın, who published a 2018 article about Bitcoin in the astrological magazine Infinity. Still not completely satisfied with the find, I kept on digging and ended up with another time when Bitcoin was registered at ICANN (domain registry in the US) as bitcoin.org. The second chart is apparently when the first block (0) was created (in Japan). Surprisingly, both display almost the same features, despite being more than 3 months apart and at different locations. 

Bitcoin – ICANN domain registration, 18.08.2008

Both charts have their AC’s in Scorpio and the planet Neptune very close by or right on the IC. The Scorpio aspected AC indicates that we are dealing with some sort of program/ concept/ idea, which becomes concrete – since Scorpio’s planet Pluto is located in house 2. Or at least as concrete as a cryptocurrency can be. Neptune, being right or close at the IC of the chart, demonstrates the “mirky”/ unclear/ hidden origin of the monetary entity. This fits nicely to the fact that nobody seems to know where it came from or who created it. This kind of “birth chart characteristic” radiates even into our present days. Neptune’s position explains why the coin is apparently preferred by organized crime and “ideal” for money laundering. It enables the coin to hide origins, this is already expressed by two possible “birth charts”. If I would have to decide which one is closer – the Tokio – “first mining chart”- would be my first choice.

First bitcoin mining – Tokio, 04.01.2009

Would I bet money on it? No, not really. The entire construct of Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency is a bit heavy on the technocratic/ plutonic side for me. The value is not intrinsic, rather heavily dependent on a common belief and is only valued because there is a finite amount of coins made. On top of it, “the coin”, like all its later relatives (Ethereum, Litecoin, Teether,..) is very tech dependent. I can see some aspects of value favouring properties in both charts, which confirm the rise of the nominal price of the coin appreciating in the past and some people even getting rich in the fast lane.

A couple of days ago I read of the planned split of the coin . This prompted me to write about the matter and pull out the charts I already had. A split means that one Bitcoin is halved and should subsequently be halved in value as well. Apparently, a split of Bitcoins has been done before. Some people in the Bitcoin community are expecting a jolt in pricing, since “more” coins and fractal coins with lower prices will be available. Others are apparently expecting the opposite, pointing out that the market would have already priced in the coming split, and after May 12th (once the split is completed) will start selling.

In lieu of a confirmed birth time for Bitcoin and subsequently, at least for me, no reliable chart, I would like to give you two quotes from a writer who truly forecasted our modern times with great precision and without any astrological tools. “The failure of technology” by Georg Friedrich Juenger.

This one fits very much to the description of crypto-currencies:

“…. the more rapidly money circulates, the better does it fulfil its technical function, which is, first of all, to circulate.”

I believe the other foreshadows the eventual future fate of cryptocurrencies in general:

“… The point of view from which technology looks upon money is a technical one. It looks at money from the viewpoint of circulation, for circulation is the most important technical function of money. Thus, technical progress is identified with an accelerated circulation of money – money is made to work more rapidly. Where treasures and possessions are by nature stable, unchangeable, and out of circulation …..”

So Juenger made a very good point: wealth is static (Venus) and very much diametric to the form of the stated properties (rapid movement) of cryptocurrencies. So cryptos fit Juengers description of money, but will not be a good store of value, since rapid movement and the more static store of value do not make a very harmonic couple. I believe that Juenger, more than half a century ago, already analysed the process quite adequately. One could conclude that Cryptos will function technically very well for the transfer of funds in the future. I just cannot see governments solely watching how the privilege of creating money is taken out of their hands; no king survived handing out the minting of money to a third party.   

But there might just be another elephant in Bitcoin’s room and that is technical innovation in general. Very likely, all present cryptos will find their fate in the next couple of years anyways. As computer capabilities will be noticeably faster in deciphering and cracking the coding behind the crypots. Initially, that ability will be the privilege for some high tech companies that can afford those kinds of supercomputers, perhaps not intending to decipher the codes. However, it will not take much time for other motivated forces to try to crack open the multibillion dollar charged crypto vaults. Closing that thought with another Juenger statement: “technology has not the attributes to create long term wealth” and as that, cryptos are only a techno child.  

I once listened to a specialist in cryptocurrencies who presented crypto-technology in the context of creating computer and website security. He stated that the general design of encrypted applications always favours the creator. The initiator will get out as the main beneficiary; everyone that follows will gradually get less and less out of it. This is when a pyramid scheme comes to mind. 

The amount of coins is supposedly limited. I cannot, however, free myself of the impression, that the splitting of the coin is comparable to the present situation in the fiat monetary system – firing up the printing presses and creating more units for a certain  amount of goods that it stands for. Despite the coming split, I guess we can expect a possible positive influx in value as people are wanting to escape traditional fiat money and are looking for flexible alternatives. 

Nonetheless, one day, in the not too distant future, when potential buyers of the digital gold will realize that newer, even more encrypted, easier to use models of cryptos are offered, the coin will follow the fate of the many technological inventions that we can now “admire” in museums. And since it is only “digital dust”, there will not be too much to look at, except a storyboard, a logo, and possibly an antiquated computer in the corner.

Copyright 2020 Dirk Heinicke all rights reserved

07.05.2020 – a link and add on to the article – usually only subscribers can read added content – but I find the article is worth mentioning, because it backs up the criminal element and origin of the virtual coin that is outlined in my commentary https://cointelegraph.com/news/the-escobars-believe-theyve-found-the-real-satoshi