Remember, hold onto your Bitcoin. Author: Yishi @OneKey, Source: lOSG Ventures. This article was published on November 4, 2023, when the BTC price was $34,522, and the text remains unchanged. @mablejiang suggested I republish this article, so I did. I do not have an X content creation program and will not receive any revenue from the views of this article. I do not have a community, do not provide any investment advice, and have no position or judgment on subsequent market trends. If you can gain any value from these words, I will be sincerely happy for you. The following is the main text: A storm is brewing. 1284 days ago, I released a video about the Bitcoin halving, predicting that the price would rise to $55,000 after the halving. That day was April 17, 2020, and the Bitcoin closing price was $7,125. Several years have passed, and the halving is about to happen again, specifically sometime in April or May 2024. This is the fourth halving in Bitcoin's history, and also the last chance for ordinary investors. Like a narrow crack in an ancient city wall under the setting sun, only a thumb-thick opening remains. When this door closes, the last chance to get on board will be gone. Xiao Feng's biggest regret was not being able to save A'Zhu. "I am a Khitan, what great ambitions could I possibly have?" The golden bottle fell into the well, and there was no turning back. My biggest regret is that I've devoted myself to entrepreneurship for nearly ten years, and before I've accumulated enough cryptocurrency, the game is about to end—this too is a kind of fate. How do we define scarcity? An Arab scholar, Saif al-Amos, wrote a book in 2018 called Bitcoin Standard, in which he discussed a "stock-production" model, simply put, the relationship between inventory and annual production. When we talk about inventory, we are counting the total quantity of a commodity. Annual production is the total amount of that commodity produced in a year. Dividing the two gives us a ratio called SF (Stock Value). In the chart, you can see that the SF for gold is 62, and for silver it is 22. This means it would take you 62 years to produce the same amount of gold as it does now, 22 years for silver, and 0.4 years for platinum. This illustrates one thing: they are extremely scarce. We then wonder if these things became currency because of their scarcity? Conversely, platinum and palladium have an SF value equal to or less than 1, indicating they are not as scarce. Indeed, gold has a stronger store of value than the other metals listed. The goods we use in our daily lives, such as food, mobile phones, computers, and cars, all have SF values far less than 1, meaning they have never been scarce. Why?The reason is simple: if someone wants a product, you can produce it. Once someone wants to hoard it, the price will rise, and more companies will produce it. The price will then inevitably fall. This is the common sense of supply and demand equilibrium. Therefore, we can easily conclude that the higher the SF (Special Offer Value) of a commodity, the better it retains its value and the less likely it is to be diluted. Look at gold: in 1972, it was $46 per ounce; in 2020, it reached a new high of $1744 per ounce, a total increase of 37.9 times. So why don't we produce more gold to meet demand? The reason is that gold mining is limited by mining technology and costs. If you spend more on something than you ultimately earn, you certainly won't do it. So, what is the SF value of Bitcoin? 19.5 million Bitcoins have been mined worldwide. However, a research report states that more than 1.6 million of these 19.5 million Bitcoins have been permanently lost. Therefore, only about 17.9 million Bitcoins are truly usable. Based on Bitcoin's current annual production, its SF (Special Value) is approximately 54, similar to gold. In a few months, Bitcoin's SF will rise to 108, with an annual inflation rate of only about 0.9%. This means that Bitcoin will become the scarcest asset in human history since gold. Halving is the fundamental reason for changing Bitcoin's supply relationship, nothing else. And this supply relationship determines the price. Some people get excited at the mention of a Bitcoin ETF, as if its approval would instantly skyrocket the price. I suggest you ignore the media headlines and focus on the substance. Whether the BlackRock Bitcoin ETF is approved or not is unimportant, nor is the timing. What matters is the expectation of a "Bitcoin ETF approval," which, as bait to boost market confidence, will gradually build momentum and subtly push the price above $45,000 in the future. You might think you're still in a bear market, but the bear market has quietly ended without you even realizing it. And this momentum will continue; it's not your tap water. BlackRock and the subsequent ETFs, like the Suez Canal, connect old money with new pools. The sheer size of these insurance funds from traditional finance exceeds many people's imagination. Bitcoin isn't too expensive for them, but rather too cheap, with a market size too small. The Suez Canal, a vast and powerful waterway, connects north-south shipping between Europe and Asia. From then on, ships no longer needed to round the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa; fleets could depart from ports like London or Marseille, sailing to Mumbai, India, and returning laden with gold, silk, and spices.In 500 BC, Darius I, King of the Persian Empire, completed the final section of the Suez Canal. He erected a granite stele along one section of the canal, inscribed: "I am a Persian. I rose from Persia and conquered Egypt. I ordered this canal to be dug, originating from the Nile and flowing into Egypt, ending at the Sea of Jurassic in Persia. With this canal completed, Egyptian ships can sail directly to Persia, just as I intended." This is the allure of a canal. The passage of the Bitcoin ETF will impact not only the present but also the next decade or more. With the flow of fiat currency unimpeded, the rest is up to time. By 2025, we might actually see Bitcoin worth over $100,000. Bitcoin is gradually evolving into a symbol of social status, resembling Manhattan land. People choose Bitcoin not because it's faster than other cryptocurrencies, but because it's expensive. Its high price stems from the core consensus within the entire crypto game; it serves as a store of value and a status symbol, sought after by everyone. Bitcoin represents your strength, your stability, your loyalty, and your faith. It's like your courtyard house in Beijing's Second Ring Road, your old villa on Hengshan Road in Shanghai, or your villa in Hong Kong's Mid-Levels. Its value is determined by the truly wealthy class with purchasing power, just like Berkshire Hathaway's Class A shares, which are valued at $530,000 each, attracting massive amounts of capital and remaining consistently high. For retail investors, even buying a single share is incredibly difficult. Ten coins can make one a king. It's a price-anchored game. If someone doesn't understand how the price of a coin is anchored, they haven't truly understood Bitcoin. Let me first talk about land, then return to Bitcoin. Everyone's played Monopoly, but I rarely see anyone truly grasp its essence. You need to understand that the Federal Reserve's role is similar to the bank in Monopoly; its goal isn't to win, but to provide enough funds to keep the game going. For the Federal Reserve, the right amount of assets is the amount that best enables it to fulfill its duties. Monopoly is essentially a game of land speculation, its core being resource monopoly. There can only be one winner; all other players are casualties. Victory doesn't come from competition, but from monopoly. Question: Where does the fiscal revenue of a central empire come from? Answer: No different from Monopoly, except for: state-owned enterprises, publicly owned land, and a monopolized financial system.For an authoritarian government, this game only concerns two things: 1) how to control the entire society using a top-down bureaucratic system; 2) how to sustain this bureaucratic system through land, taxation, and financial system commissions. This is similar in all countries, ancient and modern, Chinese and foreign. Take the Tang Dynasty as an example: the government implemented the equal-field system, all male births were allocated 80 mu of public land and 20 mu of permanent land (private land). Men in their prime cultivated the land, paid taxes, and performed labor service, with a percentage of the annual harvest paid to the government. After death, the cultivated land was reclaimed. At the same time, the emperor also allowed local governments and yamen to possess land and funds for commercial purposes. This system eventually collapsed because land became increasingly concentrated in the hands of officials and nobles. For example, during the reign of Emperor Gaozong of Tang, a man named Wang Fangyi possessed a large amount of land, approximately several dozen hectares. By the time of Emperor Zhongzong of Tang, Princess Taiping owned vast amounts of land, spread across fertile areas. This land was rented to poor farmers, with the majority of the harvest going to powerful officials, and the government taking a further cut. Many people fled to the countryside to escape forced labor. The government initially registered the names of these deserters, then ordered them to pay taxes. They either sold their land and houses or resold them to neighbors, repeating this cycle until there was nowhere left to escape. What happens when the game is lost? A new game begins. Thus, dynasties change, peasant uprisings occur, and resources are redistributed. The modern world is similar. In East Asian countries, asset values are largely tied to land. This is the rule of the game set by the government, and the vehicle is housing. The United States, on the other hand, promotes capital efficiency, so their national game is the stock market, and the purchasing power represented by the national 401(k) pension is a reservoir. These are all different price-anchoring games, and countless similar versions exist around the world: Rolex watches, Hermes Birkin bags, Yu-Gi-Oh! cards, limited-edition blind box figurines… all follow this pattern. New York City, developed and with high building density, still has over 25,000 vacant and underutilized plots of land—a full 25,000 plots (the lighter-colored areas in the image represent vacant land). Some have even proposed imposing a 3.5% tax on these lands, generating an additional $429.9 million in revenue for the city. Beijing, the most densely populated city in northern China, has an area of 16,000 square kilometers, but only 2,000 square kilometers are actually developed, a land development rate of just 12.5%, even more stingy than Hong Kong (25%). It would be easy for Beijing to have large villas per capita; based on China's planning standard of 10,000 people per square kilometer, the city, once fully developed, could accommodate 160 million people.If that's the case, why haven't any of these governments opened up housing to the poor and needy? Because in this game, land is a means of production, and monopolists must maintain its scarcity to keep the game going. This is what price anchoring is. To win, you must understand Bitcoin's position in the crypto game… Bitcoin is like land; the only difference is that it doesn't have an absolute will. What keeps the entire system running is algorithms and consensus. In other words, it's almost unbreakable. Bitcoin's biggest anchor is the consensus of its total supply of 21 million. We can easily divide Bitcoin holders into the "crypto-owning class" and those without Bitcoin into the "crypto-unowning class." With 8.045 billion people in the world, dividing these 21 million coins only gives each person 0.0026 BTC—not enough to go around. You might question, "You keep talking about consensus, but it's all just a facade. Why don't I just quit and start over?" In fact, countless people have thought this way in the past, and they have proven it wrong through their actions. The massive Bitcoin fork wave of the past few years was essentially like setting up your own private server. And now? These forked coins lie littered with corpses, a testament to the naive ideas of the past. If consensus were so easily changed, the world's richest people wouldn't need to stay in Manhattan; they could just buy a piece of wasteland in Ohio and build a new metropolis. But do you think that's realistic? Establishing a value system is a long process, and once established, it's unlikely to change for a century. Who stole your coins? Some people clearly saw the key to success, yet still prematurely exited the game. Accumulating coins is so simple, yet for some, it's harder than climbing to heaven. Every game has its levels. In the past few cycles, those orchestrating these schemes have consistently used various altcoin narratives. People say they love Bitcoin, but they buy altcoins. This plays right into the hands of the big players, who obediently hand over their chips. You get worthless coins, they get Bitcoin, and they mock each other. New public chains, platform tokens, forked coins, MemeCoin, storage, stablecoins… A closer look reveals they're all traps. When evaluating something, we shouldn't look at its performance over a few days or months. In a bull market, everything seems to rise, and many cryptocurrencies "outperform Bitcoin." I ask you, excluding those KOLs who write short articles to scam money, how many have truly held altcoins long-term and achieved significant results? On a yearly basis, how many have truly outperformed Bitcoin? You're just listening to their hype. In 2017, the narrative for public blockchains was to surpass Bitcoin; in 2021, it became to surpass Ethereum… The primary market is a PvP battle of mutual exploitation, while the secondary market is just fabricating stories. In this market, besides Bitcoin, there are no truly decentralized crypto assets.Buying any altcoin is like playing a unequal game. Web3 teams, especially anonymous ones, issuing tokens is fundamentally against human nature. When you can fork a project, modify the front-end, and reap huge profits, no one will commit long-term. What's the initial motivation? Making quick money. Tokens corrupt the mindset of a startup team. Traditional internet startups work tirelessly for years, raising Series A, B, and C funding rounds, cashing out some money each time to improve their lives—that's perfectly understandable. But in the crypto world, the pace becomes: start trading and mining today, list on an exchange tomorrow, dump the tokens the day after, and leave, returning the project to the community. Expecting to find truly dedicated teams here is incredibly difficult. That's why I say this game is unequal. To win, you need strategy. Strategy has nothing to do with short-term profits or losses, macroeconomics, or the size of the pot. A successful strategy depends on making the right choices. Every time you buy a coin, you should repeatedly ask yourself: Should I participate in this game? How much should I bet? Was my entry point the best? Can I force my opponents to abandon their positions? If you can make better decisions than your opponents, then your strategy is viable. Even if you don't win the biggest prize this time, as long as you persist, your odds of winning will accumulate, eventually leading to great success. In my limited experience, however, there seems to be only one strategy with positive expected value: accumulate coins in batches during bear markets and sell at the top during bull markets. Altcoins excel at misleading you into believing they are as enduring as Bitcoin, weaving narratives and lies until you actually believe it and obediently exchange your Bitcoin for other tokens that are worthless in the long run. The Ethereum-Bitcoin exchange rate over the past year has been the perfect trap, with piles of bones beneath every red line. I have no doubt that Ethereum will once again stand at a high level when a bull market arrives, but if you choose an asset over a 10-year cycle, you only have one choice in the entire crypto market: Bitcoin. As long as the crypto market continues to prosper, Bitcoin will not wither. If Bitcoin is eventually proven false, then the entire crypto market will cease to exist. To understand how to hold Bitcoin as a core holding, you must clearly know the quality of your assets. Two mainstream viewpoints: 1) Bitcoin is a safe-haven asset, taking the lead in price increases during times of war. 2) Governments protect retail investors (as individuals). Both are wrong. Bitcoin remains a risk asset and will likely retain this status for a long time. In 2020 and 2021, governments printed massive amounts of money, injecting liquidity and leading to a global asset bull market; its speculative nature catered to the overabundance of fiat currency liquidity.The government's purpose has never been to protect the common people, but to ensure that everyone contributes enough tax revenue and provides the necessary labor value before being taken over by the system. The government is not a "person," but a machine that maintains the system's operation within its jurisdiction by monopolizing resources. The most important component of this machine is legal tender. In 1260, Khan Kublai Khan began issuing paper money. They used mulberry bark to make it. They extracted an extremely thin layer of white inner bark from between the wood and the rough outer bark of the mulberry tree. This inner bark, after processing, became similar to what we now call paper, only black in color. Once the paper was ready, they would cut it into pieces of various sizes. Each piece represented the solemnity of real gold and silver. Why? Because officials would sign their names and affix their seals to these pieces. Once everything was ready, a high-ranking official selected by the Khan would take his imperial seal, dip it in bright cinnabar, and then press it onto the piece of paper. The moment that vermilion seal appeared, that piece of paper became real gold and silver currency. Anyone who dares to counterfeit such paper money will be executed. The paper money is backed by state authority. But state authority has a fatal weakness: it lacks constraints. The question is, who constrains the paper money issuance mechanism? The answer is, none. After the currency system entered the credit-based era, issuance became entirely at the discretion of the central bank, and even the debt ceiling could be adjusted arbitrarily. In my view, the word "ceiling" can be dropped; if it can be adjusted at will, what's the point of calling it a ceiling? The complex theories and models woven by economists are merely attempts to convince us that the central bank's issuance of paper money is subject to its own constraints. But if you look at the Federal Reserve's balance sheet, you'll find that since the credit-based era began, the so-called constraints have been nothing but empty words. When resources are scarce, issuing paper money becomes the main means of alleviating the problem. I remember when I was a child, a steamed bun cost only 25 cents, but now in Shenzhen, you need to pay 3 yuan or even more. The currency has already depreciated 12 times. Since we can get used to a 12-fold increase in the price of a steamed bun, what's unacceptable about a further 12-fold depreciation of the currency in the future? We've gradually become accustomed to the way we pay bills and receive salaries, and to the numbers on our bank balances and credit card statements. Only when the system crashes do we begin to consider the true value behind these numbers. In short, government money printing is borrowing time from everyone holding cash, hoping that future social productivity can repay this debt. Whether it can be done or not is not the concern of this administration.Bitcoin acts as an anti-inflationary weapon. Its essence is a ruble against fiat currency. Night is coming, and you shall begin your watch tonight, and rest until your death. Give your life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. Remember, hold onto your Bitcoin.