Live data from Hacker News

The “Million Dollar Homepage” as a Decaying Digital Artifact

lil.law.harvard.edu

41–50 of 167 posts

Re: The “Million Dollar Homepage” as a Decaying Digital Artifact

#41

I just heard about the "Million Dollar Homepage" for the first time last week. Would this idea (or one like it) work today? Making a million dollars for something so bizarre, fun, and straightforward sounds amazing. Can anyone reference other attempts at similar ideas?

BitCoin, where the inventor managed to convince people to accept a new currency, mined the first few blocks of it, and ended up with a billion dollars in paper wealth as a result.

Re: The “Million Dollar Homepage” as a Decaying Digital Artifact

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like "go to a VC with any idea in year 2016" ?

Man, I must have been a real idiot to not get a VC to say yes in 2016. Worth noting that it seemed, at the time, like there was less interest in seed rounds (especially after Twitter's decline) and more in Series A,B, etc.

I know I am naive, but to me it looked like:

X Money From VCs => Y (discounts to users/deals with businesses to "start using my product") => High sales => Repeat (Series A/B...)

Re: The “Million Dollar Homepage” as a Decaying Digital Artifact

#44

I just heard about the "Million Dollar Homepage" for the first time last week. Would this idea (or one like it) work today? Making a million dollars for something so bizarre, fun, and straightforward sounds amazing. Can anyone reference other attempts at similar ideas?

The Yo app was valued at +5m usd less than 3 years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yo_(app)

Re: The “Million Dollar Homepage” as a Decaying Digital Artifact

#45

I just heard about the "Million Dollar Homepage" for the first time last week. Would this idea (or one like it) work today? Making a million dollars for something so bizarre, fun, and straightforward sounds amazing. Can anyone reference other attempts at similar ideas?

Trading one paper clip for a house https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_red_paperclip

Re: The “Million Dollar Homepage” as a Decaying Digital Artifact

#48
post #22
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Initial Coin Offerings are bizarre, fairly straightforward and can be fun.

> fairly straightforward I've read a lot about ICOs and I still don't understand what's going on. I can't even tell what people are actually buying (like EOS, where it explicitly says the tokens are worthless and not convertible). An even bigger question is why people are throwing so much money on them when it's so unclear what you're getting.

It probably makes more sense when you realize that many ICO buyers are "whales", big cryptocurrency holders who bought in when the currencies were much cheaper and amassed large amounts. When the news headline says an ICO raised $180M, that doesn't actually mean people spent $180M on tokens. Rather, they converted $180M of Ethereum, at its current valuation, which they may have purchased for say $1M collectively. The individual holders might not actually be spending more than $5-10K of their own money (or possibly nothing, if they got their ether through mining), but that money has appreciated to be worth say $1M at Ethereum's current value.

It's a good example of a double pyramid scheme. The value of Ethereum is itself going up; it was worthless 4 years ago but now has a market cap of $20B. And then you can "spend" Ethereum to get additional tokens out of an ICO, which means that you're buying into another pyramid scheme with tokens which themselves have appreciated. The huge dollar values, after the double conversion, generate great news stories, which inspire more people to buy into Ethereum, which prop its value up even more, which mean that the companies who did ICOs can convert their cryptocurrency to dollars at better rates and inflate their dollar values even more, which inspires more ICOs at bigger valuations, and so on.

Lest this sound too dodgy, remember that all currency is itself a pyramid scheme: it's inherently worthless, and worth only what peoples' expectations of its future valuation will be. So the endgame for cryptocurrencies is either they run out of hard-currency buyers, in which case their value comes crashing down and everyone who bought in loses everything, or they replace the dollar as the world reserve currency and everyone who didn't buy in loses everything. I think the latter option is unlikely, but also underpriced, in the sense that it's more likely than most people give it credit for.

Post reply on HN