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

Bitcoin as a Game

jpkoning.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 82 posts

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#11

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

layoric wrote: post #8
obilgic wrote: post #2

Then I would say gold is exactly the same. In fact, gold would be a riskier betting game as information is less transparent (estimating supply, how fast It's mined etc) compared to bitcoin.

Gold has a actual use as a commodity, eg in electronics and other equipment, and derives a minimum value as such. So whilst how gold is used in trading circles might have similarities to BTC, this difference IMO makes them nothing alike.

Bitcoin has a just as relevant, or more so, actual use in buying drugs and frowned upon things on the internet, escaping government restrictions on money, etc.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#12

Post by mc3 »

layoric wrote: post #8
obilgic wrote: post #2

Then I would say gold is exactly the same. In fact, gold would be a riskier betting game as information is less transparent (estimating supply, how fast It's mined etc) compared to bitcoin.

Gold has a actual use as a commodity, eg in electronics and other equipment, and derives a minimum value as such. So whilst how gold is used in trading circles might have similarities to BTC, this difference IMO makes them nothing alike.

The quantities used are usually very small though. Gold plated not made of gold. I don't think the use as a commodity drives or explains the price.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#13

Post by wmf »

luxuryballs wrote: post #10
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> gold is exactly the same Gold is similar. It's got more history. But it's more difficult to transact with. Bitcoin appears to be this generation's (late-boomer to early-millennial) gold or trading cards or what-have-you.

Is it more difficult to transact with? I can hand you a gold coin. But with bitcoin we need the internet and a whole network of miners.

OTOH Bitcoin is easier to transact at a distance than gold.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#14

Post by aazaa »

> The premise behind bitcoin-the-game is that the current wave of buyers must guess when (or if) a subsequent wave of buyers will emerge, this second next wave's participation being contingent on when (or if) they believe a third wave of buyers to emerge. If they guess right, the early birds win at the expense of the late ones. ...

This is a truly tired analysis. It goes by various names, including "greater fool theory." Notice how it applies to almost every asset being traded today?

Stocks? Remember dividends? Not so much these days. Poster child is Amazon, but there's a slew of others that offer virtually nothing to investors other than price appreciation.

Government bonds? Do do negative interest rates sound? You buy one of these because either you have to or you think others will have to.

Real estate? Please. Take away price appreciation driven by easy money and few would bother "owning."

What this piece ignores is the world's ever-encroaching governments and the ongoing assault on privacy - with money as the fulcrum.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#15

Post by LanceH »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #11
layoric wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gold has a actual use as a commodity, eg in electronics and other equipment, and derives a minimum value as such. So whilst how gold is used in trading circles might have similarities to BTC, this difference IMO makes them nothing alike.

Bitcoin has a just as relevant, or more so, actual use in buying drugs and frowned upon things on the internet, escaping government restrictions on money, etc.

Gold has those same uses but at an international level and is generally approved of. The gold may never actually move, but ownership will transfer between countries.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#16

Post by JimboOmega »

aazaa wrote: post #14

> The premise behind bitcoin-the-game is that the current wave of buyers must guess when (or if) a subsequent wave of buyers will emerge, this second next wave's participation being contingent on when (or if) they believe a third wave of buyers to emerge. If they guess right, the early birds win at the expense of the late ones. ... This is a truly tired analysis. It goes by various names, including "greater fool theo…

At least with stock, even if they aren't paying a dividend in theory you own a portion of the earnings stream; it is instead reinvested in the company. But still a lot of companies do pay them (e.g. AAPL). If you owned all the shares of these companies you'd own something quite valuable that could return to you a lot of money, I think we all agree on that. (The ones with no dividend and you don't vote or control anything is worse).

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#17

Post by jcranmer »

layoric wrote: post #8
obilgic wrote: post #2

Then I would say gold is exactly the same. In fact, gold would be a riskier betting game as information is less transparent (estimating supply, how fast It's mined etc) compared to bitcoin.

Gold has a actual use as a commodity, eg in electronics and other equipment, and derives a minimum value as such. So whilst how gold is used in trading circles might have similarities to BTC, this difference IMO makes them nothing alike.

The primary use of gold, AIUI, is jewelry in India.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#18

Post by XorNot »

aazaa wrote: post #14

> The premise behind bitcoin-the-game is that the current wave of buyers must guess when (or if) a subsequent wave of buyers will emerge, this second next wave's participation being contingent on when (or if) they believe a third wave of buyers to emerge. If they guess right, the early birds win at the expense of the late ones. ... This is a truly tired analysis. It goes by various names, including "greater fool theo…

Stocks represent actual ownership in the company, potentially voting control of the boards decisions.

Government bonds are backed by the full force and trust of the government they represent, and repay the face value plus yield promised at the time they were bought. They represent the most reliable yield you can get.

Real estate? You mean that thing you live in?

This is all a bunch of a false equivocation with one goal: "please buy my Bitcoins and give me USD for them"

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#19

Post by astrodust »

dpc_pw wrote: post #6

The author just described how bitcoin has property of money (being a speculative bet that a given asset will carry value in the future), and deduced that bitcoin is not money.

That's not what money is.

You're describing futures.

Re: Bitcoin as a Game

#20

Post by r32a_ »

Zimahl wrote: post #7

The problem with the Bitcoin game is there is no longer the 'millionaire overnight' scenario as a possibility. Sure, you could buy 1 coin and it could go up 10x, yet you'd still only be (at this time) $90k richer. Which isn't bad but the big climb from decimal places up to full dollars is where there was more possibility. Common folks can take a gamble on 100 coins for $1 a piece, they really can't take a gamble at $…

Lightning network payments are denominated in sats. So you can buy 1 Sat for $0.0000945 USD
Post reply on HN