Left-Leaning Outlets Amplify Their Anti-Bitcoin Bias Following Trump's Endorsement

A look at the different biases presented by mainstream media coverage of Donald Trump's endorsement of Bitcoin.

View Details

The Wall Street Journal Is Dead Wrong About The NFT Market’s Supposed Collapse

The NFT market is thriving, actually. Once again, the Wall Street Journal makes a fool of itself by tackling subjects beyond the publication’s comprehension. The author declares “the NFT market is collapsing,” citing suspicious numbers and two cases of bad trades as proof. And then, to top it all off poses a terrible theory. The “NFT Sales Are Flatlining” article is embarrassing beyond belief. Disclaimer: The following op-ed represents the views of the author, and may not necessarily reflect the views of Bitcoinist. Bitcoinist is an advocate of creative and financial freedom alike. Among other things, it proposes the worst definition of NFTs ever written:  “NFTs are bitcoin-like digital tokens that act like a certificate of ownership that live on a blockchain.” No, NFTs are not “bitcoin-like” at all. And the WSJ just forgot about the “non-fungible” aspect of these unique digital assets. And yes, someone bought an NFT of Jack Dorsey’s first tweet for $2.9M, another person bought a Snoop Dogg endorsed one for $32K. Both tried to auction the digital assets and only got embarrassingly low offers. Based on those two cases, the WSJ implies that the whole NFT market is dead on the water. THE DEATH OF NFTs… One buyer purchased a Snoop Dog curated NFT in early April for about $32,000 worth of the cryptocurrency ether. It's now up for auction, with an asking price of $25.5 million. The highest current bid is for 0.0743 ether—about $210.https://t.co/dg54XYijxh — Steven Russolillo (@srussolillo) May 3, 2022 The WSJ bogus numbers about the NFT Market Admittedly, the Wall Street Journal probably has access to a wider array of data than NewsBTC. However, the numbers they use to prove the NFT market is dead are suspicious as hell.  “The sale of nonfungible tokens, or NFTs, fell to a daily average of about 19,000 this week, a 92% decline from a peak of about 225,000 in September, according to the data website NonFungible.   The number of active wallets in the NFT market fell 88% to about 14,000 last week from a high of 119,000 in November.” Notice that they don’t link to NonFungible and provide a few low-resolution graphs that the normal eye can’t audit. However, everyone can go to NonFungible. The number of sales for May 3rd is 104.465 and that represents $206B. Hardly the signs of a dead NFT market. Granted, the number of sales for April 3rd is approximately 14K, but on May 1st the NFT market moved a whooping $778B in 117K sales. That’s not it. The WSJ also presents these stats as if they prove its case: “The imbalance between supply and demand is also hurting the NFT market. There are about five NFTs for every buyer, according to data from analytics firm Chainalysis. As of the end of April, there have been 9.2 million NFTs sold, which were bought by 1.8 million people.” Have they even been to OpenSea? There are hundreds of collections. And NFT aficionados own dozens of pieces. Sometimes, hundreds. Sometimes, thousands. And that’s just one platform that serves one blockchain. Five NFTs for every buyer is nothing. ETH price chart for 05/04/2022 on Coinbase | Source: ETH/USD on TradingView.com The Wall Street Journal’s Off The Mark Theory This might be the most ridiculous part of the article. Let’s let the author bury himself: “There are signs that collectors may also differentiate between NFTs that catalog a vast set of cartoonlike characters—like the CryptoPunks—and tailored, NFT art projects spurred by major artists who already enjoy museum followings.”  And then he talks about Jeff Koons and Chinese artist Cai Guo Qiang, who sold out NFT collections, and director Kevin Smith, who’s planning to. Meanwhile, Moonbirds set the NFT market on fire and the Bored Ape’s Otherside literally broke Ethereum. We’re talking billions of dollars for the “cartoonlike characters” team. Not only that, The Nightly Mint points us towards Nansen’s numbers.  6/ Taking a look at NFT Paradise, volume is robust – the last two weeks are both set to be among the top-10 in history (measured in ETH). Users per Week and Transactions per Week are likewise looking to reverse downtrends that began at the start of the year. pic.twitter.com/edNKzddMQW — Nansen?? (@nansen_ai) May 3, 2022 They clearly show that “the last two weeks are both set to be among the top-10 in history (measured in ETH).” And that “the Blue Chips and Social sectors are on a tear, up 81% and 83% YTD.” So, what game is the Wall Street Journal playing? Is this a case of poor research or evidence of malicious intent? That’s for you to decide, dear reader. Featured Image by Philip Strong on Unsplash | Charts by TradingView

View Details

Malice Or Ignorance? The New York Times Keeps Printing Lies About Bitcoin Mining

The New York Times’ campaign against bitcoin rages on. Even though this time they had the perfect opportunity to write a balanced article, they didn’t. The author reports one positive bitcoin mining story after another, while keeping a snooty attitude and suggesting it’s all a PR move. The title summarizes the New York Times’ stance, “Bitcoin Miners Want to Recast Themselves as Eco-Friendly.” Related Reading | Valkyrie Bitcoin Mining ETF “WGMI” Approved For Nasdaq Listing Before we get into it, a quick story. The foremost expert in bitcoin’s energy consumption, Nic Carter, published an exhaustive report on mining. Among other things, it contained hard data that showed to what extent China was mining using hydropower energy. Mainstream media largely ignored it. The party line was that we couldn’t trust China’s statistics. And, that China was probably burning cole.  Fast forward to last month. China banned bitcoin mining a while ago and bitcoin’s hashrate relocated, recovered, while the network functioned perfectly throughout. Most of China’s mining industry relocated to green energy-abundant countries. What did the New York Times post? An article called “China Banished Cryptocurrencies. Now, ‘Mining’ Is Even Dirtier,” that claims that Chinese miners were using hydropower energy and thus used cleaner energy. That’s the level of propaganda we’re dealing with. What Did The New York Times Say About Bitcoin Mining This Time? The article starts by featuring Argo Blockchain, the company is building a new facility that “would be fueled mostly by wind and solar energy.” They even quote Peter Wall, Argo CEO, saying. “This is Bitcoin mining nirvana. You look off into the distance and you’ve got your renewable power.” What could be wrong with that? Two paragraphs later, the New York Times starts pushing lies and embarrassing numbers:  “A single Bitcoin transaction now requires more than 2,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity, or enough energy to power the average American household for 73 days, researchers estimate.” Of course, those ridiculous claims come from Digiconomist, a widely debunked researcher who happens to be an employee of the Dutch Central Bank. And then, they blatantly quote the malicious study mentioned in the intro.  “The Bitcoin network’s use of green energy sources also dropped to an average of 25 percent in August 2021 from 42 percent in 2020. (The industry has argued that its average renewable use is closer to 60 percent.) That’s partly a result of China’s crackdown, which cut off a source of cheap hydropower.” And quote Alex de Vries, one of the study’s authors, being completely off the mark. “What a miner is going to do if they want to maximize the profit is put their machine wherever it can run the entire day.” WHAT? To maximize profit, a miner is going to find the cheapest source of energy possible. Energy is their biggest cost. The cheapest source possible is energy that’s currently being wasted. That’s the situation. BTC price chart for 03/26/2022 on Forex.com | Source: BTC/USD on TradingView.com More Feel-Good Stories Framed As Bad News The New York Times even quotes Paul Prager, TeraWulf CEO, saying “Everyone I talk to now is talking about carbon neutrality. The language has absolutely changed.” And then, the newspaper spreads the good news. “TeraWulf, has pledged to run cryptocurrency mines using more than 90 percent zero-carbon energy. It has two projects in the works — a retired coal plant in upstate New York fueled by hydropower, and a nuclear-powered facility in Pennsylvania.” None of these stories are celebrated. Remember the article’s title, they are cynically presented as PR stunts. Then, it´s time for Sangha Systems, who “repurposed an old steel mill in the town of Hennepin. Sangha is run by a former lawyer, Spencer Marr, who says he founded the company to promote clean energy. But about half the Hennepin operation’s power comes from fossil fuels.” The New York Times Closes The Loop That’s the worst example that the New York Times could find. A person who “founded the company to promote clean energy” but had to make a compromise to start his business. To close the article, the author brings us back to Argo Blockchain and tries to pull something similar. Apparently, the CEO “can’t guarantee that Argo’s new center will have no carbon footprint. That would require bypassing the grid and buying energy directly from a renewable power company.” Related Reading | Biden Loves Intel’s Plan To Produce Semiconductors. What About Bitcoin Mining? And then, they quote him again. “A lot of those renewable energy producers are still a little bit skeptical of cryptocurrency. The crypto miners don’t have the credit profiles to sign 10- or 15-year deals.” So, Argo is really trying but it’s not possible at the moment for understandable reasons. And the whole industry is moving to a greener path because the incentives are aligned that way. Got it, New York Times. Got it. Featured Image by tacskooo on Pixabay | Charts by TradingView

View Details

Yet Another Reminder That Many Bitcoin Critics Are Subpar

The funny thing is that Bitcoin is going to win in such a fantastic way because it is rooted in proof of work.

View Details

Bitcoin at $100K: How the medias perception has shifted since 2009

Mainstream media has attacked everything from Bitcoins creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, to Bitcoins volatility and high-energy consumption.

View Details

Names of non-US FTX users demanded by mainstream media outlets

A number of mainstream media outlets are pushing to publicize the personal details of FTX’s non-U.S. customers, similar to what happened with Celsius.

View Details

‘Totally Irresponsible’ — Bitcoin Proponents Express Discontent Over Twitter’s Doge Logo Change

After the Twitter logo was changed from the original blue bird to a cartoon image of the famous Shiba Inu Doge, the cryptocurrency dogecoin rose significantly in value and is now up 27% more than 12 hours later. However, a number of bitcoin proponents expressed distaste for the logo change, and a few insisted that [...]

The post ‘Totally Irresponsible’ — Bitcoin Proponents Express Discontent Over Twitter’s Doge Logo Change appeared first on Crypto Breaking News.

View Details