You think that attack had something to do with that decision? I confess that never occurred to me and it should have.
Honestly not an expert. I don’t even follow cryptos tbh. Just that news items like this catch my eye once in a while. Could even speculate that Elon’s pandering to China going by the news here, especially if you consider the statement on climate concerns.
The timelines are really striking though:
- 12-MAY-20 - Colonial pipeline resumes operations
- 13-MAY-20 - Tesla announcement
- 18-MAY-20 - China bans crypto transactions
- 20-MAY-20 - Biden Administration’s crypto crackdown.
Could be Elon either pre-empted it or got wind of the crypto crackdowns in Tesla’s two biggest markets.
Could public opinion be also be shifting in favor against cryptos? Not just with cyberattacks but news articles like exacerbated GPU shortages because of cryptomining (this lead to Nvidia trying restrict a recent model against ETH mining).
As a corporation I believe it was a good move for Tesla to distance itself from accepting cryptocurrencies for now atleast.
Well, the man has the money and influence to find out about this happening before ordinary people do, so I wouldn’t be surprised if that happened.
Ye, that’s what I thought too the moment I saw the timeline.
I pasted the wrong hyperlink for the story around speculative Chinese pandering. This is the one. The excerpt:
Musk thought highly of China’s commitment to pursuing a low carbon economy and sustainable energy consumption in the country’s 14th Five-Year Plan, adding China’s targets to reach carbon emissions peak around 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 are aggressive and great goals.
Its time to ignore all Musks talks. As soon as all the crypto community done this all will come in place.
Won’t happen if industry players feel he’s good for cryptos. What will lessen the his impact is if other major players, like Jack Dorsey, as indicated here, take on cryptocurrencies.
I think a lot of the criticism leveled at Musk is unfair. I think most folks have a hard time distinguishing between his personal opinion and corporate responsibility. His personal passion for cryptos is undeniable and he was the first adopter to try and integrate it in mainstream retail:
- A news release just now even hints at his earlier remarks about climate concerns being more genuine than not.
- He clearly supports the new BTC mining council that debuted recently to address transparency.
- If news reports are accurate TSLA still retained 90% of it’s BTC portfolio, incurring an estimated $700M loss.
Problem is that even if he believes BTC is God’s gift to mankind he has to stay on the wayside till better regulation and transparency is enforced. And that is his corporate responsibility. He cannot afford to risk undermining TSLA as a corporation by going on common sense alone and any bullish sentiments he might have.
As for the criminal use of BTC, with authorities recovering >50% of the ransom, cyber criminals are looking at alternative cryptos, like Monero. Remains to be seen if criminal elements find BTC unattractive over time.
I’ve generally been ignoring what he says for a while now. He’s been erratic for a while.
It is extremely odd, I do not think that the decision had anything to do with the environment concerns, it is all about trying to manipulate the crypto market and make the most of it.
Fun times.
1 Like
I wish Musk would make up his mind already, this is exhausting.
Exactly. 
Suprised no crypto enhusiasts picked up on how the shutdown of just one coal plant in April caused an alleged 35% hashrate drop, which led to a 14% 2-day drop in BTC.
Summary:
Xinjiang’s massive role in global crypto mining was driven home in April 2021 when a single coal plant in the region flooded and shut down for a weekend, reportedly reducing worldwide Bitcoin mining capacity by around 35 percent.
If the shutdown to one coal plant can cause such global havoc it stands to reason BTC is mostly mined on fossil fuels . Makes sense why the BTC mining council was set up to provide more transparency on these issues.
1 Like
So much swirling around at the moment seems its there to confuse the majority rather than anything substantial for sure
I think Elon just corrected a market that was bound to head down at the time. He appears to have publicly stated what academics and government bodies knew or were finding out.
For e.g. This study published by the Bank of Italy, a day before Elon’s announcement, compares CO2 footprint of BTC and TIPS (a Eurozone payment system). The ECB also published this on 19MAY and had this to say "Its price volatility makes bitcoin risky and speculative, while its exorbitant carbon footprint and potential use for illicit purposes are grounds for concern."
Here’s a very revealing article that had this to say:
To academics who for years have been measuring bitcoin’s energy intensity, however, Musk has simply pointed out an established truth, albeit in his eccentric manner. It is a question so far largely ignored by governments, by heavy-hitting environmental charities, and by the banks and exchanges that facilitate the vast cryptocurrency industry.
Here’s a devil’s advocate POV: Elon may have just pre-empted a larger crash on BTC by having Tesla pull out of BTC and helping form the BTC Mining Council. If they can convince major regulatory bodies that they are green energy compliant they might have at saving BTC from caving in completely.
From the looks of it a substantial amount of people aren’t very happy that it’s only speculative and uses more energy than some countries even.
I think a more cynical person might view Musk’s involvement in first “Bull” then “Bear” terms as classical market manipulation ! 
His initial purchase and tweeting is considered manipulative by atleast one economist. The 90% BTC retention is what Elon claims (retained stake could be much lower) and the price of BTC rising also had a direction impact on TSLA shares rising (apparently rose by 2% when price hit $44K). Looks like there’s definite grounds for manipulation if he benefited from it.
If he’s not offloaded any of the crypto apparently TSLA’s sitting on a $90M loss though:
I could be very naive saying this but I believe if he channels that energy and focus on to kind of innovation he’s already delivering at a steady pace, it would be more financially lucrative for him than if he did by pumping up BTC. For e.g. like this bit about education.
What I don’t get it is why is he bullish on BTC? With his involvement in the energy sector he should know the associated energy costs with BTC. He also knows it’s highly speculative atm too and he’s not a speculator. If he believes in the underlying blockchain aren’t there arguably better alternatives out there?
Winklevoss twins stepping up for BTC:
“Through the initiative, Gemini plans to purchase carbon credits for nearly 350,000 metric tons of carbon to offset non-renewable energy consumed by Bitcoin miners and help decarbonize Bitcoin on the Bitcoin network.”
Now that is certainly an interesting approach.
July 21’s gonna be a fun day 
Note to self: don’t touch Bitcoin in July. 
1 Like