狗狗幣Dogecoin是什麼？讓Elon Musk也瘋狂狗狗幣的起源、用途介紹 #虛擬貨幣 (160001)

]

GME軋空事件震撼了美國金融圈，除了股票市場動盪之外，虛擬貨幣也連帶受到了影響。日前台灣中央銀行粉絲專頁發表了一篇介紹「狗狗幣」的貼文，狗狗幣(Dogecoin)又稱為「多吉幣」或「旺旺幣」，和比特幣(Bitcoin)同樣屬於虛擬貨幣的一種。2021年初GME事件發生，狗狗幣在美國Reddit鄉民和Elon Musk的連帶鼓吹之下達到超過800%的漲幅，出乎意料地再度成為了金融圈的話題焦點。雖然狗狗幣如今已成為世界上流通的主要虛擬貨幣之一，但事實上，狗狗幣的起源只不過是一句玩笑話，它的建立也可以歸因於網路迷因的流行。為什麼狗狗幣叫做「狗狗幣」？和網路迷因有什麼關係呢？讓我們繼續看下去。

相較於比特幣起源於一篇嚴肅的學術論文，狗狗幣的誕生可說是非常「獨特」，它的創造可以說是網路流行話題的結合，也因此狗狗幣的代表圖案就是知名的迷因Doge。相信大部分的人都曾經看過柴犬Doge(狗狗的實際名字為Kabosu，醋橙，但迷因稱之為Doge)的梗圖，1隻日本柴犬配上特定的文字說明，在台灣尤其以「關於感情的問題我一律建議分手」為最主要的流行。

2013年正逢比特幣興起，許多跟風的山寨虛擬貨幣也像春筍般冒出，而同時鋪天蓋地的Doge梗圖也直接或間接造成了網路使用者的精神汙染。狗狗幣的創始人之一，Jackson Palmer當時是Adobe的員工，他用一種諷刺的幽默感將Doge梗圖和虛擬貨幣結合，製作了一張有著Doge頭像的貨幣。Jackson Palmer將這張惡搞圖案放上Twitter，寫著「投資狗狗幣吧！這將是下一件大事(或譯為『一定可以大賺一筆』)」的貼文內容，在發佈之後，這則貼文很快地受到廣大網友們的迴響，於是Jackson Palmer在網友們的鼓吹之下，買下dogecoin.com網域，並在網站留下訊息，徵求想要讓狗狗幣成真的夥伴。

事實上，Jackson Palmer對於加密貨幣一竅不通，狗狗幣也真的只是一個玩笑話，從來沒有想過會真的實現。然而，IBM的工程師Billy Markus在偶然下看見了狗狗幣的訊息，Billy Markus一直都有研究加密貨幣，希望能夠創造出一款讓人們可以廣泛使用，而非單純使用於投資的虛擬貨幣。於是Billy Markus在見到狗狗幣網站後，聯繫了Jackson Palmer，二人的合作讓狗狗幣正式誕生，並且在網路迷因的散播之下，dogecoin.com網站短短30天之內就有超過百萬名訪客。

▲狗狗幣介紹。創造於2013年12月，由萊特幣(Litecoin，比特幣的改進)中派生出來。狗狗幣將挖礦(mining)改成挖洞(diging)，並且將字體改成Doge迷因中使用的Comic Sans字體。

狗狗幣的創辦人Jackson Palmer曾經提過，狗狗幣和比特幣最大的不同，在於狗狗幣並非為了投資而生，因此它擁有更低的挖礦(挖洞)門檻、更方便的購買方式、以及更低的交易費用。在理想的情況下，狗狗幣被設定為一種輕鬆詼諧的虛擬貨幣，它站在虛擬貨幣投資的對立面，一開始設定為1000億個，後續則改為數量無上限，保護狗狗幣的價格。

因為狗狗幣並不值錢，它最常使用在小費和打賞的情況，網友可以在網路上用狗狗幣表達感謝、支持，且因為一般人無法擁有比特幣等其他虛擬貨幣，狗狗幣正好填補了這樣的空缺，讓對虛擬貨幣有興趣的人更容易參與。狗狗幣也常被使用在慈善行為，在2014年，當狗狗幣社群見到牙買加雪橇代表隊沒有經費參與冬季奧運的時候，他們建立了募款活動，最終成功讓雪橇隊可以出國比賽。

對於雪橇隊的比賽支持讓狗狗幣多出了一種俠義的形象，接下來狗狗幣還完成了肯亞水井挖掘募資計畫、以及在2014年3月成功募集了6780萬狗狗幣(當時約5.5萬美元)，贊助NASCAR駕駛員Josh Wise比賽。Josh Wise讓賽車使用狗狗幣的贊助塗裝，這讓狗狗幣在比賽過程中被評論員提起，車體亮相的同時也為狗狗幣宣傳。

▲狗狗幣塗裝賽車，後來美國狗狗幣鄉民的力量也讓Josh Wise在粉絲投票比賽中勝出。(圖片來源：Wiki)

Good to see @Josh_Wise bring back the @dogecoin helmet last weekend! That was such an awesome deal to be apart of pic.twitter.com/VaLUt3LssY

比特幣以外的新星！狗狗幣今年漲900%

]

Dogecoin（狗狗幣：DOGE-USD）在今年成為眾人矚目的焦點。從今年開始，狗狗幣的價格僅為0.005美元，到2月初達到了創紀錄的0.0872美元，即8.7美分。現在是5.7美分。

聽起來價格不算很高，但百分比確實增加了很多。今年到目前為止，狗狗幣的價格上漲了900％。

在過去的12個月中，加密貨幣的交易和投資激增，包括比特幣、以太坊、萊特幣等。最受歡迎的比特幣在2021年上漲了95％，價格剛剛超過57,000美元。同時，許多國家的利率處於創紀錄的低水平。因此，大量投資者將加密貨幣視為一種財富，類似於黃金或其他商品所提供的財富。

狗狗幣目前的市值為73億美元，是最有價值的加密貨幣之一。澳大利亞新南威爾士大學的Usman Chohan表示，狗狗幣的市值在2014年僅為4,800萬美元。他指出，狗狗幣的生產時間表也很瘋狂。到2015年年中，已經有1,000億個硬幣，並且以每年大約生產52億個新硬幣的進度成長中。

儘管短期內可能出現波動，但鑑於投資者對加密貨幣的風險偏好，預計狗狗幣遲早會創下新高。

Dogecoin是由軟體工程師Billy Markus和Jackson Palmer於2013年發明。他們的主要目的是創建一種無需傳統銀行手續費的即時付款系統。與比特幣不同，狗狗幣不限制可以生產的硬幣數量。

最初，狗狗幣主要用於在互聯網上，「感謝」他人的「積極貢獻」，例如提供想法或與網路相關的服務。但是自2013年以來，人們對狗狗幣的興趣逐漸建立起來。

然後，在2021年1月，Gametop和AMC Entertainment開始了大反彈，這主要是由於Reddit交易員的興趣。當這些散戶投資者尋找下一個趨勢時，狗狗幣獲得他們的青睞。

特斯拉CEO馬斯克也在推波助瀾，他在2月4日發推文改挺狗狗幣，一句「狗狗幣是大家的加密通貨」（Dogecoin is the peoples crypto），幫助該幣當日飆漲超過50％，攻上0.05978美元。

狗狗幣最初被視為模仿硬幣，如今已名列成千上萬種加密貨幣中市值排名在前的熱門商品。然而，計算狗狗幣的真正價值並非易事。目前市場上狗狗幣被高估，還是低估的說法都存在。

目前投資者希望狗狗幣能一路反彈至1美元，但它的價格暫時可能會起伏不定。

文章來源：Investorplace

（中時新聞網趙永紝）

Dogecoin (DOGE): What It Is, What It’s Worth and Should You Be Investing?

]

Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) – The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission sent Goldman Sachs Group Inc. shares tumbling by 13% in a single day in 2010, when it accused the firm of defrauding customers by selling them a mortgage-backed investment that was secretly designed to fail.Eleven years later, shareholders who lost money that April day are before the U.S. Supreme Court in a case that could deal an even more sweeping blow to investors. In an argument set for Monday, Goldman Sachs will urge the court to put new limits on class action shareholder suits, and toss out a case that seeks to recoup potentially billions of dollars.Investor advocates say they’re nervous ahead of the first Supreme Court clash over shareholder lawsuits since former President Donald Trump appointed three justices and created a 6-3 conservative majority. The court is scheduled to rule by late June.“I am very concerned, and very concerned where this particular court might come out,” said Lynn Turner, a former SEC chief accountant.The investors, led by the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, say they were deceived by Goldman Sachs’ repeated public assurances that it was being vigilant about avoiding conflicts of interests. They say the assurances proved to be false, as details emerged about a group of so-called collateralized debt obligations, known as CDOs, including the Abacus portfolio that was at the center of the SEC suit.The SEC said in its lawsuit that Goldman Sachs created and sold Abacus without disclosing that the hedge fund Paulson & Co. helped pick the underlying securities and bet against the vehicle.Later that year, Goldman paid $550 million to settle with the SEC, a record amount for a Wall Street firm. Though Goldman didn’t admit wrongdoing, the firm said it made a “mistake” in not disclosing the Paulson & Co. role, an unusual acknowledgment in an SEC case.Blunt EmailWall Street’s peddling of CDOs remains a touchstone of the global financial crisis, evidence to many that clients’ interests came second to the massive profits bankers were making for themselves. Much of the 2008 economic collapse was fueled by losses suffered by banks and hedge funds that owned the complex securities. Ultimately, the U.S. government was forced to provide a $700 billion taxpayer-financed bailout for the financial industry.Investigations by the SEC, Congress and the Department of Justice quickly followed, causing a drop in the share prices of Goldman Sachs and other banks at the time.Goldman was featured in a scathing report on CDOs by a Senate panel, and former Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein was among several employees hauled up to Capitol Hill to testify. At a 2010 hearing, the panel’s now-retired chairman, Michigan Democrat Carl Levin, blasted the executives over an internal email that labeled one of the securities Goldman was selling as “one sh**ty deal.”“Your people think it’s a piece of crap and go out and sell it,” Levin said at the hearing. “We’re talking about betting against the very thing that you’re selling, without disclosing that to your client.”The Supreme Court case centers on the rules the court has crafted to determine whether shareholders have enough in common with one another to press a securities-fraud suit as a class action.Stock ImpactIn 1988, the top court said judges can presume that investors all relied on any public misrepresentations when they bought shares. But that ruling also said defendants can rebut that presumption – and block certification of the class action – by showing that the statements had no impact on the share prices.Goldman Sachs says its assurances about conflicts were so “generic” they couldn’t possibly have been responsible for propping up the stock price. The statements included promises in regulatory filings that the firm had “extensive procedures and controls that are designed to identify and address conflicts of interest” and that “our clients’ interests always come first.”The “extreme generality of the alleged misstatements makes it exceedingly unlikely that the statements had any impact on the stock price,” Goldman told the Supreme Court in court papers.But a divided federal appeals court said the bank had to wait to make that argument and couldn’t use it as a reason to block class action status. A two-judge majority said Goldman was improperly “smuggling” an argument about the materiality of its statements into the class-action analysis.Biden in the MiddleThe suing investors have partial support from President Joe Biden’s administration and the SEC. The government says the appeals court should have considered Goldman’s contention that its assurances were too generic to prop up the share price. But the U.S. also says Goldman and its allies are going too far in seeking a categorical rule that some types of statements are legally incapable of affecting stocks.“Courts considering particular facts may appropriately credit evidence that seemingly generic statements would have been significant to the trading decisions of reasonable investors,” acting U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said in court papers.Investor advocates say a ruling in Goldman Sachs’ favor could leave companies free to mislead investors with impunity.“It runs to whether or not when you’re investing your money into the markets, you can trust them, you can have confidence that they’re giving you accurate, complete information, and they’re not omitting any facts,” said Turner, the former SEC accountant. “All too often, we’ve seen where management has put out false facts to hype their stock.”University of Michigan law professor Adam Pritchard, a former SEC official who joined a brief supporting Goldman, called the shareholder activists’ concerns “nonsense,” and said the court is likely at most to take a middle ground in its decision. Part of the problem, he said, is that the case focuses on “trivial, procedural questions” that the justices, with little expertise in securities law, won’t fully comprehend.“They will not do anything useful,” said Pritchard, who’s recently written a book on the Supreme Court and securities law. “They are in over their heads.”The case is Goldman Sachs v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, 20-222.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

follow us