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

Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 188 posts

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#131

Post by Nasrudith »

hanniabu wrote: post #81
guenthert wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bitcoin and cryptos in general are actually worth more than $0 because people are tired of seeing their cash devalued on the whim of politicians and bankers. Inflation serves a purpose. The cash is devalued not on a whim, but to prevent collapse. Bitcoin indeed prevents that. Fortunately it's just a fringe market. Lets hope it stays that way.

> The cash is devalued not on a whim, but to prevent collapse. Tell that to Venezuela.

Under that logic we should not drink because people have died of drowning and water intoxication.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#132

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

emteycz wrote: post #99
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen this comment before, and honestly I think it's cheap. This article is about a clear, real problem with the current implementation of Bitcoin, namely that it requires enormous amounts of energy. I am not "anti-Bitcoin", I am anti a payment and financial storage protocol that requires gargantuan amounts of energy. So if you have a problem or comment on the article in question, please make it, we're all ears.…

Valid criticism is one thing, but this wave of criticism ignores so many basic facts about Bitcoin mining and energy generation/transportation/storage it's unbelievable. It also ignores the benefits, handwaving them away as if they didn't exist at all (it's all nice and easy for the firstworlders they can't even imagine there's a world without reliable banks, but there is!) while offering no alternative. Why would pe…

To be 100% clear, I believe your comment is exactly the type of valid counterargument I'm talking about, i.e. you bring up unique issues that Bitcoin solves, and point out that other monetary systems have high costs as well. Those are things one can have an honest debate about.

That is very different than the "HN is so anti-Bitcoin bringing up decade old strawmen" comment I responded to. Perhaps most obviously by the fact that there are many in the crypto community itself that believe the energy usage of BTC is a real problem and are attempting to come up with viable alternatives like proof of stake.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#133

Post by zacharytelschow »

ad31mar wrote: post #55

So much anti-Bitcoin sentiment on HN lately, recycling decade old strawman arguments. Does the Occam's razor apply here? Are people just salty they didn't buy a few back when they first heard about it, now trying to justify themselves?

Maybe? I'm sitting on the sidelines very comfortably hoping a bunch of people don't get hurt. I feel as if the bulls are ignoring the fundamentals and limitations of Bitcoin.

I agree with Bitcoin being neither money nor commodity - nor anything else, really. To me Bitcoin is Gamestop on a grander scale, a bunch of people deciding something has value that really has none (or in the case of Gamestop very little). I don't regret "missing" the hype in either case, preferring investments that make sense based on the fundamentals (assets, cashflow, profits, etc) instead of bets on pure speculation.

I do, of course, want to be "right" about Bitcoin (who doesn't like being right?) but it's far more of a curiosity for me than anything else.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#134

Post by PragmaticPulp »

rawtxapp wrote: post #111
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t matter. Most of the coins have already been mined. New entrants must buy from old entrants.

Old entrants that may have bought it because they believed in it pushing it to mainstream. How do you feel about the government that's about to print 1.9 trillion dollars, therefore devaluing your money?

Bitcoiners bring up inflation as if our only two options for investment are cash under the mattress or buying Bitcoin.

I keep my investments in companies and assets like most other investors. The economic stimulus might devalue the It’s amazing that Bitcoin proponents only ever want to talk about the USD (or other local currency) value of their Bitcoin, yet they want us to ignore the fact that Bitcoin isn’t the only option for investing cash.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#135

Post by mamon »

Ecstatify wrote: post #84
mamon wrote: post #43

Nouriel Roubini has a well known hate for Bitcoin, which probably originates from the fact that it escapes his alleged "expertise": he hasn't foreseen its popularity, and rise in value. Now he hates it, because this past mistake threatens his status as financial guru, "Dr Doom". EDIT: I wouldn't take anything he says about it seriously, he's basically clueless on the topic. EDIT2: In free markets value of something,…

Don’t agree with what he says let’s attack his intellect... “originates from the fact that it escapes his alleged ‘expertise’” “he’s basically clueless on the topic”

He says that bitcoin has "no intrinsic value" and he's wrong about that, because value of something is not decided by financial experts, but by people willing to pay for it (even if those people are criminals looking for new ways to launder their money).

He has also been predicting that "Bitcoin bubble will burst" for the past few years, and he's been wrong about it so far.

So yes, I would say he is clueless when it comes to Bitcoin.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#136

Post by bustin »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #13
bustin wrote: post #5

How does someone measure the potential value of "being a pain in the ass to those who seek to control the supply of money"

Being a general pain in the ass is of negative utility. Define "controlled supply of money" with reference to counter-examples of uncontrolled money supply? Money supply needs limits, surely?

I could have been more specific, you're right!

I believe the value of cryptocurrency is to neuter governments' abilities to inflate or devalue currency with the push of a button, and to improve our ability to transact freely with one another.

I absolutely agree with you that money needs limitations, such as hard rules on supply increases. A money supply that is uncontrolled in such a way that you can make more or less whenever you personally feel like it regardless of the other users' intentions won't be useful for very long.

I personally think of cryptocurrency like a constitution but for money - whereas before whoever had the biggest guns could decree How It Is Now, the guns will be powerless to what is written down. In this way, it removes power of a select few to control the supply of money for their benefit.

I don't know how this ends. Is it a net negative to the human experience? Anarchy? The select few who got into bitcoin early wielding all the power now? Taxation falling to the wayside and a deterioration of quality of life? Each of these is somewhat possible, but as someone who has 2nd hand experience of what a country can do when it has free reign to issue whole new currencies and remove old ones or devalue the existing one into oblivion, I don't really care.

Let's ride this puppy and annoy some people.

EDIT: some phrasing

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#137

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

iamben wrote: post #76
bustin wrote: post #5

How does someone measure the potential value of "being a pain in the ass to those who seek to control the supply of money"

Taking neither side, but just thinking of my parents - neither of who are anything 'tech' or anything 'finance'. Completely normal in most regards. For them, someone actively controlling the supply of money is probably a good thing. Anything they have is pretty safe in a bank and somewhat covered by the government. Their taxes pay for police, sewage, the bins to be taken away, their roads to be repaired. I love the i…

> As soon as you start talking about cryptocurrency with oversight to protect my mum and dad, where people aren't just trying to get rich quickly and make sure taxes are paid - people seem to dial out pretty quickly.

There is literally no role for the key feature of blockchain - decentralised ledger, proof of work-backed transactions - in this case. You might as well use a trusted, regulated party with a database. You know, like Visa do.

The "incredible things" are also pointless things. That also burn energy like there's no tomorrow. Double meaning intended.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#138

Post by zacharytelschow »

RIMR wrote: post #9

>The economics professor believes bitcoin is "not a unit of account," is "not a scalable means of payment," and is "not a stable store of value." Instead, he argues, it is a pump and dump scheme, where fear of missing out leads retail investors to speculate on an ever-increasing bubble. In literally no way is this guy wrong.

On point on all three. Bitcoin is definitely not currency.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#139

Post by PragmaticPulp »

coralreef wrote: post #116
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost of wind and solar was going down already. Bitcoin alone isn’t the driver. Bitcoin is, however, consuming some of that new energy generation with a new consumption: Doing useless calculations to mine Bitcoin. Bitcoin increases energy demand which also drives an increase in supply . We can’t take old power plants offline if the new hydro power is taken up by new mining operations. It’s silly that we’re going to su…

Costs go down with scale; scale comes from demand. Energy on earth is not a finite, limited resource. Fossil fuels are finite, but energy is not. The earth is bombarded with more potential energy every day then we could ever spend, aka solar energy.

At this point you’re just tossing out unrelated statements without even trying to tie them back to an argument.

Yes, the Earth is bombarded with a lot of sunlight. So what? Doesn’t change the fact that Bitcoin is consuming existing electricity infrastructure that we could be using for something else.

Re: Nouriel Roubini: Bitcoin is not a hedge against tail risk

#140

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

bustin wrote: post #136
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being a general pain in the ass is of negative utility. Define "controlled supply of money" with reference to counter-examples of uncontrolled money supply? Money supply needs limits, surely?

I could have been more specific, you're right! I believe the value of cryptocurrency is to neuter governments' abilities to inflate or devalue currency with the push of a button, and to improve our ability to transact freely with one another. I absolutely agree with you that money needs limitations, such as hard rules on supply increases. A money supply that is uncontrolled in such a way that you can make more or les…

> I believe the value of cryptocurrency is to neuter governments' abilities to inflate or devalue currency with the push of a button

Central banking is necessary function of government. If government saw their ability to do it being actually "neutered" then it would get shut right down.

I am not saying that it can't be mismanaged by a state, but you do not have anything better than state fiat money.

> personally think of cryptocurrency like a constitution but for money

(eyeroll)

> Let's ride this puppy and annoy some people.

You ride on. Ride off. Ride far away.

Post reply on HN