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

New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

univaasa.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 193 posts

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#171

Post by V-2 »

DFHippie wrote: post #84
V-2 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I do see value in a crypto that's pinned at a weighted average of every single currencies' worldwide weight" The values of currencies are only relative (established by exchange rates). How do you calculate an average for all the existing currencies (weighted or otherwise)? What am I missing?

You use the price of some common basket of goods. Most participants in an economy are chiefly interested in the price of goods and services, after all, not other currencies. Of course, choosing the basket of goods and adjusting it over time is a little tricky...

I feel like it's a different measure than the proposed one, though.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#172

Post by bko »

maest wrote: post #143
bko wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is plenty of blame to throw around during interventionist policies during the Great Depression. Take a look at Wickard v Filburn: > An Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed animals on his own farm. The US government had established limits on wheat production, based on the acreage owned by a farmer, to stabilize wheat prices and supplies. Filburn grew more than was permitted and so was ordered t…

> It was illegal for farmers to grow wheat above a certain amount... on their own land... to feed their own animals... I don't find that surprising or scandalous. Wheat is (approximately) fungible, so if you produce more for yourself, you're decreasing the marginal demand for wheat in the market. Besides, barring everyone from overproducing wheat makes more sense than only banning people who somehow intend to sell th…

Imagine being a poor starving farmer in the worst economic depression in this history of your country, and being told you cannot grow wheat on your land to feed your family. When you ask why, you get a lot of handwaving about how food prices are too low, despite people starving.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#173

Post by celticninja »

africanboy wrote: post #89
celticninja wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is there to reply about? Schiff has been calling bitcoin a scam for years. The linked tweet says that no one will be making a profit, which ignores a lot of people who have already made a lot of money. So it's disingenuous, also he has been wrong for a decade.

bitcoins are valued at $ 600 billions, with 6 million active users it's an average of $ 100,000 per user, which is not much in 10 years time. probably less than 1% made a lot of money, the rest lost some.

Honestly you are talking rubbish. Bitcoin is currently just below it's ATH, so if anyone lost money it is because of stupid trades and not because the value of what they bought diminished severely.

So according to your research 99% of people who have bought it have lost money. That's complete bullshit, I personally don't know anyone who has lost money, they have all made significant returns, so unless they represent your 1%, I say again, you are talking bollocks.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#174

Post by celticninja »

africanboy wrote: post #89
celticninja wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is there to reply about? Schiff has been calling bitcoin a scam for years. The linked tweet says that no one will be making a profit, which ignores a lot of people who have already made a lot of money. So it's disingenuous, also he has been wrong for a decade.

bitcoins are valued at $ 600 billions, with 6 million active users it's an average of $ 100,000 per user, which is not much in 10 years time. probably less than 1% made a lot of money, the rest lost some.

Also your numbers are nonsense. A bitcoin is currently worth $60,000. 10 years ago they were worth perhaps 0.1 cents each. I am pretty sure you could not find anyone who would agree that the gains made by bitcoin over the last decade could have been beaten by any other investment.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#175

Post by DennisP »

endisneigh wrote: post #27

It makes sense. In my experience the primary goal for most crypto holders is to be a part of a new elite. This is why the most popular currencies have a fixed supply. That way, if they're popular earlier adopters get to be a part of the elite. With such a premise it makes sense to treat crypto like the lottery as the gain/loss likelihood is very similar to say, Mega Millions. I do see value in a crypto that's pinned…

The only way that would be an economic problem is if the fixed-supply currency were the only currency, i.e. the one and only legal tender. That seems very unlikely to happen.

Even if government currencies were to somehow disappear, it would still be trivially easy for anyone to launch a new currency, just by deploying a short script on any smart contract chain.

With multiple currencies, we're closer to the competing private currencies advocated by Hayek, who thought they'd bring about a stable economy without need for manual intervention. I'm not competent to judge whether he was right, but it's clear we're not going back to an equivalent of the gold standard.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#176

Post by [deleted] »

matthias509 wrote: post #43
toolz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe for developed nations - that doesn't represent much of the world

So high tech crypto is the solution to making trading with the developing world easier? Aren’t these the same sorts of places which struggle to have reliable electricity, let alone internet access?

[deleted]

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#177

Post by toolz »

peytn wrote: post #28
toolz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

globally recognized stores of wealth that can be transferred instantly makes no sense to you? Have you ever tried to trade with someone outside of your country, it's not easy or cheap. If fiat money is a bad thing, then I guess we're all doomed since the entire worlds economy is based on fiat money. cryptocurrency will have the ability to solve global equality problems like no other tech has been able to in history.…

The “store of wealth” excuse is pretty transparently just to lure greater fools after the crypto-is-money thing didn’t pan out. The only wealth that’s stored is the network of people pumping these things. And guess what: that network will move on to the next thing eventually.

I use crypto as money _frequently_ - so it did and is panning out. You may as well be trying to convince me the sky isn't blue while I'm looking up.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#178

Post by toolz »

africanboy wrote: post #170
retrac wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in developed countries a non-trivial proportion of the population is not banked. (Estimate for Canada: 6% of adults do not have any form of bank account.) It can be the large majority in many developing countries, including ones where most people have electricity at home and a smartphone can be bought for a few day's wages. Sending a small amount of cash from Brazil to Canada is not trivial in many cases. And of…

> such that it can be illegal for people to send money out of the country so it would be illegal to send crypto money if we are exploring illegal ways to do things, crypto is just one of many solutions and probably not the cheapest or easiest > Assuming that you can trade Bitcoin on both ends, it really is often the simplest way to simply move money between people outside the formal banking system Talking about Afric…

I think you're really taking for granted that a trustless system means I don't need to consult some greedy central power to ask them permission to send funds to my family in a restricted country.

If your family was barely surviving in a restricted country I'm sure you would send funds to them as well. I don't derive ethics from existing power structures and I certainly sleep better at night helping people regardless of regulations.

You're free to have your own ethics and disagree with me - that's the beauty of trustless systems, you can make your own decisions as can I.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#179

Post by rasengan »

endisneigh wrote: post #163
rasengan wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My biggest concern is a fixed-supply currency gives no government the ability to provide stimulus if necessary. If people have consensus to fork and create more coins, then so it will be; but that decision will not be made alone by a single actor.

Meaning it’ll never happen as holders of crypto are accountable to no one .

A simple proposal and vote by software upgrade would allow the coordination of this.

It’s happened many times already in the blockchain space.

Re: New study detects lottery-like behavior in cryptocurrency markets

#180

Post by gher-shyu3i »

pchristensen wrote: post #164
gher-shyu3i wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> richer than anyone should be What's the upper limit on how rich a person should be in your view?

I think most people wouldn't be able to provide a dollar value for the upper limit, but could confidently say that $100B is over it.

Why is $100B too much? Who's to say there is some inherent limit to wealth? Sounds borderline communist if you ask me (and I'm not a free market capitalist myself).
Post reply on HN