Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 327 posts

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#271

Post by xapata »

hndamien wrote: post #192
GavinMcG wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Scheme" implies a unified/central schemer, though. We can already call it a fad, or a mania (a la tulip mania).

It certainly does seem to be a "scheme" but I wonder how it compares to other fiat or gold currency when looked at through a "scheme" lens.

Fiat currency generally has some military, militia, or at least a police force and a tax payable in that currency. Gold is somewhat similar historically, though has been abandoned for that purpose in recent decades.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#272

Post by Goladus »

chii wrote: post #212
krrrh wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preston Byrne pointed out since there is no pyramid, this can’t be called a Ponzi scheme. It deserves a new name, the “Nakamoto scheme”: https://prestonbyrne.com/2017/12/08/bitcoin_ponzi/

why not call it a bubble, just like everything else like it that has come before in history? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

Because it's not just a bubble. Bitcoin is, on a technological level, specifically designed to be an inflationary digital asset that primarily benefits the founders. Whatever utility it has as medium of exchange is incidental to its primary purpose which is to enrich the founders.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#273

Post by emanuelsaringan »

hannasanarion wrote: post #265
shemnon42 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The change needs to be coordinated, but how do you coordinate action between multiple actors when some of those actors are nefarious and actually acting against the change?

By punishing them with the force of law, just like we do with everyone else who doesn't follow the rules.

China is playing chess while everyone is playing checkers.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#274

Post by b_tterc_p »

a13n wrote: post #208
jklepatch wrote: post #96

What puzzled me is how comes blockchain startups did not sell their crypto for fiat just after their ICOs. I recommended this to several of my blockchain customers but none of them listened. I dont know if that was motivated by greed or something else. According to Game theory there is no benefit in not selling the crypto for fiat: if you raise lets say 10million during an ico (typical amount raised 6m ago), there is…

> if you raise lets say 10million during an ico (typical amount raised 6m ago), there isnt much you can do with 20M (i.e you keep the crypto and it doubles) that you cant do with “just” 10M. By that logic, why invest in anything ever?

There’s an unstated assumption that investing 10M in crypto offers high risk of losing it all. The utility of losing 10M is worse than the utility of gaining an additional 10M- and much moreso when weighted with common sense probabilities.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#275

Post by cageface »

afarrell wrote: post #266
cageface wrote: post #206

2018 is the year that we learned that complex social problems can not be solved by technology. From the political weaponization of social media to the collapse of the ICO market we've seen that the techno-utopian dream is largely just that, a dream. Social change takes hard work and the slow building of consensus, not just clever code. We have seen, however, that we can do a lot of damage to the social fabric with po…

> 2018 is the year that we learned that complex social problems can not be solved by technology. I’ve been hearing this notion, asserted with simplicity and exhaspiration, for the past 10 years. I don’t agree. “Technical solutions to social problems”, certainly do exist. Sewer systems that keep people from contracting cholera. Cold chain logistics systems that bring nutritious foods into the hearts of cities. Prosthe…

Maybe it's more accurate to say that complex social problems can't be solved by technology alone. There's been a rarely questioned assumption that a bunch of hackers in a room together can single-handedly disrupt and reshape society in constructive ways. I think we're seeing now that this is a naive and even dangerous point of view.

To elaborate on your examples, things like sewers and wheelchairs benefit us but they depend on a social and legal framework to do so and require coordination, planning and consensus to be useful.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#276

Post by fooker »

Nasrudith wrote: post #214
cageface wrote: post #206

2018 is the year that we learned that complex social problems can not be solved by technology. From the political weaponization of social media to the collapse of the ICO market we've seen that the techno-utopian dream is largely just that, a dream. Social change takes hard work and the slow building of consensus, not just clever code. We have seen, however, that we can do a lot of damage to the social fabric with po…

I think that the biggest issue is frankly bullshit. Bullshit in the sense of complete lack of sensitivity to the truth so long as it leads to the outcome they want. Technology isn't at fault here but bullshit is on so many levels it isn't funny. The stupid internet rumors and social media manipulation? Bullshit because they want to influence people - they don't care if it is true or not. Company valuations? They don'…

One man's truth is another's opinion.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#277

Post by dajohnson89 »

Goladus wrote: post #272
chii wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why not call it a bubble, just like everything else like it that has come before in history? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

Because it's not just a bubble. Bitcoin is, on a technological level, specifically designed to be an inflationary digital asset that primarily benefits the founders. Whatever utility it has as medium of exchange is incidental to its primary purpose which is to enrich the founders.

*deflationary

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#278

Post by vbs_redlof »

yodsanklai wrote: post #210
seanwilson wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What puzzled me is how comes blockchain startups did not sell their crypto for fiat just after their ICOs. I'm not sure what's puzzling: The startups who base their business around crypto believe crypto will rise in price. A crypto startup selling all their crypto because they think there's a high risk crypto will crash in value is also sending out a very bad signal to potential investors.

> The startups who base their business around crypto believe crypto will rise in price A startup may very well work on some blockchain technology while not believing that a particular cryptocurrency will rise in price.

But it is far less common to come across startups who believe this. Think of blockchain startups as the top 1% of the most optimistic investors who believed in the technology so much that they created companies around an immature infrastructure.

Selection bias explains why they held even even after a 90% correction.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#279

Post by pesmhey »

hannasanarion wrote: post #264
pesmhey wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? Could this really be as obvious in hindsight as looking at Sears in the 90s not developing an online catalog?

What would block chain do for Goldman that a SQL database couldn't?

I’m literally not sure, hence the question. I don’t know much about blockchain other than its sort of an answer to the Byzantine generals problem? It was a legit question.

Re: As Bitcoin Sinks, Industry Startups Are Forced to Cut Back

#280

Post by pesmhey »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #80
pesmhey wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? Could this really be as obvious in hindsight as looking at Sears in the 90s not developing an online catalog?

> What stops GS from replacing their fee-based offerings with a blockchain solution? What does that sentence even mean? To me this is right up there with "I'll create a GUI interface with Visual Basic and see if I can track an IP address."

It literally means what the words say. What stops Goldman Sachs from replacing whatever mechanism they use to process payments with some coin. I would gladly accept the answer ‘because it doesn’t make sense’. Didn’t realize I’d get so much heat for this though.
Post reply on HN