111–120 of 830 posts
So does it make sense to put in some money that I’m okay with losing now or have I missed it?
I just wanted internet money, not a speculative financial instrument. :(
Does anyone else feel like: - they've missed an opportunity to get rich with minimal effort from crypto - still have absolutely no interest in jumping in at this point?
I'm always tempted to make some kind of agent simulation, where all agents know they are in a bubble, but hope they can get out before everyone else. Then eventually the price pops and, pop.
> many crypto investors to believe the latest bull run is different "This time it's different" isn't an argument I find compelling for why something that is known to have bubbles and manipulation isn't in a bubble.
For 12 years, just bubbles? First it was over 1 cent, then over $1, over $1000, now over $50k.... when will you consider the possibility you may have been wrong? At $100k? At $1M? (which most models indicate as a plausible target price in 10 years) Let me give you my favorite quote, pulled from another HNer comment: "I enjoy reading comments about Bitcoin here because even without any venture backing, it achieved a b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. Cryptocurrencies in general seem to have potential for being used in day-to-day transactions in the future, but Bitcoin itself mostly seem to be used to store value. The planned limit on the total amount of Bitcoin in circulation, transaction fees and long transaction times seem to be quite a blocker for using it to buy a cup of coffee.
Money has to be first established as a store of value, before it can be used as a medium of exchange. As Bitcoin finds a more stable price point, it will become more interesting as a medium of exchange and an unit of account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's a bit worrisome that we are inching towards the scenario where companies may be tempted at an economy wide scale to reduce investment in production Yes, fully agree. But then ask yourself: aside from COVID, who created the economic conditions that lead corporations to decide that stashing treasury as Bitcoin is better than investing in the "productive" part of the economy. QE, interests rates at near zero, cor…
The important thing for the aggregate economy is that when people want "hard assets", that these assets can tangibly support future consumption, not just something everybody hopes to trade later for consumption but real stuff such as businesses, inventory, production capacity etc. When too many people hoard pure financial promises or crypto tokens and all believe that it's true wealth, bad things happens. People indi…
To be clear, the above is good, if interest rates on government paper were above risk adjusted market returns for new capital this would gridlock the economy. Stock market being high incentivizes creating new capital.
> how do you protect your treasury other than stashing it in hard assets (crypto, gold, commodities)?
The government should not create artificial assets that "protects" wealth from being subject to the real economy because people divesting from the economy destroys the economy.
Now there is a question whether the market will choose to go into crypto and divest from the real economy anyways. The reason this is a question is that people have been known to pile into bubbles in the past, and this is the tricky part, on some level they are not totally irrational in doing so. To the individual, being early in a long running bubble is advantageous. When you do it, and do it first, you gain. Everybody doing it however, may cost you and your friends, family's and everybody's careers.
It's a prisoner's dilemma, a bad Nash equilibrium. It's Moloch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Money has to be first established as a store of value, before it can be used as a medium of exchange. As Bitcoin finds a more stable price point, it will become more interesting as a medium of exchange and an unit of account.
Still, transaction times longer than a few seconds, and fees larger than a few cents puts Bitcoin in a worse position than regular Visa transactions/Bank transfers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For 12 years, just bubbles? First it was over 1 cent, then over $1, over $1000, now over $50k.... when will you consider the possibility you may have been wrong? At $100k? At $1M? (which most models indicate as a plausible target price in 10 years) Let me give you my favorite quote, pulled from another HNer comment: "I enjoy reading comments about Bitcoin here because even without any venture backing, it achieved a b…
Which models? The only thing I can find to support your claim is random people tweeting that they think it will be worth 1M. I guess when enough people say something it becomes a "fact"
Notice how the trend is eerily aligned? Just because you couldn't find it doesn't mean you have to be snarky about it.
What am I missing?