The Rogue Wave

I now posit that cryptocosm will appear to be nearly dead from 2024.³⁵ – 2028.⁶⁵.

Following up the discussion above and in further support of this conceptualization of increasing volatility and collapse for the fake Core BitcOn (which everyone thinks is Bitcoin) whilst the legacy, real, immutable, Satoshi “v0.1” Bitcoin (not BSV not BCH) will continue rising (to $1 million before ~2028 but may not trade on any exchanges) but most people having been fooled and thought Bitcoin had died as the price of the Bitcoin forgery named Bitcoin Core craters to ~$775, it appears that crypto is being intentionally pumped up now for a big crash (perhaps May 2020 at the halving[1]) so that public confidence can be directed towards Facebook’s 666 Libra as the 2020.⁰⁵ – 2024.³⁵ confidence-in-private-assets wave gives way to the 2024.³⁵ – 2028.⁶⁵ public wave before the final phase transition moonshot private wave peak in 2032.⁹⁵. The SegWit donations “attack” (actually a defense mechanism) will cause the ignorant sheepeople to think proof-of-work failed because they’ll incorrectly think the miners attacked Bitcoin (when in fact the miners protect the immutability of Bitcoin’s protocol which is what gives Bitcoin unforgeable costliness). Thus the (foolish) public may turn to proof-of-stake shitcoins including Libra.

Also note the halvings of Bitcoin nearly coincide with the 4.3 year cycle shifts on Armstrong’s ECM. On this coming private wave 2020.⁰⁵ – 2024.³⁵, the public (e.g. all the greater fools) must be kicked off of real Bitcoin onto some confidence-in-public-institutions (i.e. not trustless, permissionless) 666 shit named Libra. The sheepeople must huddle together idolizing an earthly King (e.g. Core BitcOn then next Fedbook’s Libra) so they (pigs) can be slaughtered. So it appears we have one last hooray rally for the greater fools to pile in on before the monumental 2020.⁰⁵ cycle turn date:

@HairyMaclairy wrote:

Bitfinex to introduce 100x leverage...

Armstrong wrote:

So once again, we are looking at the calm before the storm.

Tether has created $600 million out-of-thin air to (and needs to double that every month) presumably pump up the Bitcoin price. BitMex also has 100X leverage, which as discussed in the following video is evidence of a move away from public regulation to privatized Wild West gambling:

So the scenario envisioned by this post is a new ATH for Bitcoin $50+k ($78k was my original estimate) before end of 2019. The a U bottom decline for the real Bitcoin, but the Core BitcOn imposter cratering to ~$775 perhaps at the May 2020 halving[1]. Presumably since this would be a public-confidence peak, then the altcoins would also moon one more time as Bitcoin peaks. One last hooray before doomsday.

So will Mcafee get his 1M bitcoin before 2021?

Possibly. Click that chart above for the scenario charts I drew in May. I posit those could still apply to the real Bitcoin whilst the Core BitcOn imposter craters to ~$775.

@Biodom wrote:

I am of the same persuasion (two peaks as in 2013): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=178336.msg51518490#msg51518490
The gist of it: up to 65K (in 2019, early 2020), down to $16.7K (before halving), up again to $300K.
Perhaps, this would emerge as WO "prediction" consensus.

Imagine the demand for real Bitcoin from whales who are dumping that Core shitcoin for the real Bitcoin global reserve currency that will eventually be the reserve backing for Libra. Imagine that only the desperate will be willing to sell any real Bitcoin for lower than $1 million. The hodling would presumably become even more iron-fisted/feudalistic.

My original fractal pattern analysis, speculated that this 2020+ period would coincide to 2010. A reset of the entire cryptocosm to the time when there was only real Bitcoin and no altcoins. It would make sense that is what the powers-that-be want to do before they launch their 666 Libra medium-of-exchange enslavement system for the sheepeople.

So perhaps last chance to dump the 1000s of altcoins is coming soon if Core BitcOn peaks by the end of 2019 $50+k. The cryptocosm collapse to ~$0 (except for real Bitcoin which many people may entirely ignore or not even know exists since it is only for the uber wealthy not for the masses) would fit well with giving the public the illusion that trustless, decentralized cryptocurrency was a Tulip bubble and complete failure.

Eventually the cryptocosm will come alive again but by then the FATF (36 countries) will have so heavily regulated exchanges and “proof of source of funds” KYC, that FOMO speculation may not be plausible?

Essentially 2024 to 2028 appears to be a global monetary reset. And possibly also war. Intense hyperstagflation. Totalitarianism. Chaos. Capital controls. Stripping wealth from everyone, except the powers-that-be.

Remember $1 million Bitcoin price will be a harbinger of misery:

https://steemit.com/money/@anonymint/rise-of-hard-money-is-a-harbinger-of-misery

The powers-that-be have laid out the nearly perfect plan. If starting in 2020 they crash the cryptocosm to remove all funding and interest for blockchains other than projects in the Libra ecosystem, they can kill any desire to spend Libra for cryptocurrencies. That would also cut off funding for critically important developments needed for resistance to their global medium-of-exchange hegemony such as for a revamped Zcash design. Then by 2028, after they have completed the strong dollar vortex and ready to destroy the dollar, then they start to back Libra with (the real) Bitcoin. Then nobody has an incentive to spend Libra to speculate on cryptocurrencies, because Libra will from that juncture forward track the value of Bitcoin (albeit without all the gains in real Bitcoin before 2028) and presumably regulations would be so intense and Libra so widely used that no other medium-of-exchange blockchain project has any chance of significant interest. And by 2028 it should be clear that no other store-of-value can compete with Bitcoin.

Perhaps the only way out of this dilemma perhaps would be if some project could remain funded and launch during the 2020 timeframe despite low interest level and somehow be countertrend. Perhaps by clever technological achievements that enabled it to piggyback on Libra adoption and/or fulfilling needs that Libra doesn’t, such as anti-censorship, strong anonymity, no KYC required to obtain it such as if it can be proof-of-work mined (Libra isn’t proof-of-work), while also having transaction scaling and instant transaction confirmations.

I suggest that those who intend to help fund such a project, such as by buying the tokens of such a project, convert some of your cryptocurrency to gold which for which you have documented the “lineage proof of source of funds” so you can be prepared to exchange for fiat and wire funds to developers perhaps in exchange for their (fully documented “proof of source of funds”) project tokens. Again noting that eventually such a project becomes the alternative to Libra and thus presumably appreciates in value as the cryptocosm recovers from the posited “attack” on Core (and Litecoin?) if it happens as speculated in this blog. If the posited “attack” never occurs then the profit taking in 2019 was just an insurance policy. It’s probably wise to also hodl some Legacy Bitcoin (e.g. addresses that start with 1 instead of 3) long-term.

Onboarding is really a key factor. Figure the only way people in the developing world will obtain Libra is if someone chooses to pay or donate to them in Libra. Note with Armstrong’s strong dollar vortex thesis, companies in developing countries may abandon their local currencies in favor of the more stable Libra unit-of-account, which appears to be what Facebook is relying on for their Libra adoption. That’s very difficult for non-backed cryptocurrency to compete with, because the volatility of non-backed, trustless cryptocurrency is incompatible with serious business usage.

The only way I can envision to counteract this fact is intensely develop the applications which either depend heavily on trustlessness and/or which the users are not very sensitive to volatility in the price. Users which are not sensitive to volatility in price will probably prefer the hodl appreciation in store-of-value, instead of the stable value of fiat reserves of Libra. An example of a killer app which depends on trustlessness is disintermediating Amazon.com so that sellers can’t be censored/deranked by Amazon when they’re attacked by competitors (e.g. who post negative reviews, etc). Libra might essentially function trustless for some period of time, but for example if someone was selling illicit drugs on such a decentralized variant of Amazon.com, I imagine the Libra Foundation would be compelled to act to censor such activity. An example of activity which isn’t much sensitive to exchange price volatility is gaming.

One of the key features for an alternative to Libra is that it must be a two-tiered currency— a hodler store-of-value token distinct from a medium-of-exchange token. Because for one reason the medium-of-exchange token will have “illicit” lineage in many cases and thus probably be rejected by many exchanges. Whereas, hodlers of the store-of-value token could be careful about the lineage of their “proof of source of funds” if they intend to exchange into Caesar’s fiat system at some point in the future.

The main point is the world will bifurcate into Caesar’s economy with Fuckbook’s Libra money system, and the trustless, decentralized economy. It will eventually become impossible to move medium-of-exchange tokens between these two economies because of the fungibility issue. But store-of-value can be move between the two systems, for those token lineages that have maintained “proof of source of funds” trail for Caesar’s system. Libra was the name of the standard weight for measuring money during Caesar’s Roman empire.

So I think there is a way to provide an alternative to Libra, a truly private wave asset not even dependent on trusting a consortium of corporations, but it requires that someone is actually developing it.

[1] Or the next halving 2024 if Craig Wright is bluffing?