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

Bernie Madoff has died

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 406 posts

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#231

Post by tim333 »

saalweachter wrote: post #137
kolinko wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you just redefined a the name „Ponzi” to mean something else than the commonly accepted definition.

Here, let me google that for you: https://www.google.com/search?q=ponzi+scheme+definition Pon·zi scheme /ˈpänzē ˌskēm/ noun a form of fraud in which belief in the success of a nonexistent enterprise is fostered by the payment of quick returns to the first investors from money invested by later investors.

That's not really a good definition, dragged up by the Google bot without a link to the source. It says "Definitions from Oxford Languages" but I'm having a job finding where that was from.

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis...

was kind of similar and has " a plan for making money that involves encouraging people to invest by offering them a high rate of interest and using their money to pay earlier investors. When there are not enough new investors, people who have recently invested lose their money."

which I think is what is usually meant by a ponzi scheme and is different from bitcoin.

Even with your definition bitcoin doesn't really fit:

"form of fraud" - bitcoin was completely open about what you were getting from the start

"nonexistent enterprise" - the first and largest decentralized digital payments system. The more legit complaint is the enterprise is wrecking the environment more than it doesn't exist.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#232

Post by [deleted] »

saalweachter wrote: post #97
tim333 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin isn't really a ponzi scheme though, just an asset that gets bid up. In a ponzi you pay in x and are promised x+50% or some such and the scheme fails when there isn't money to pay out x+50%. With bitcoin you buy for price x and sell for price y which may be higher or lower. Different thing. It can't fail, just go up or down in price.

Eh, I'm comfortable calling Bitcoin a Ponzi scheme because all profits extracted by early investors come from later investors. That's, like, a very specific and applicable definition.

[deleted]

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#233

Post by saalweachter »

shawnz wrote: post #194
hctaw wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the nonexistent enterprise is the use of bitcoin as a medium of exchange

Bitcoin actually functions as a medium of exchange and that's not an enterprise anyway. Is there an expectation that by buying Bitcoins, you are funding the growth of a business which creates profits by using your investment, and those profits are where your investment return is coming from? If that's not the case, then it isn't a Ponzi scheme.

Yeah, but ... I am constantly told that Bitcoin (et al) is the future, that it is revolutionary, that it is going to be big in some way -- that it will replace "fiat" currencies, for instance, although the exact way it is going to be big has changed over time.

That some people are making money hand over fist by investing is then used as proof that it is a good investment.

That the fake enterprise is just lazy meta-financial-jargon rather than a more effort-full fake building project or an imaginary hedge fund with fake books and blueprints and a fancy office and whatnot isn't enough to make the definition inaccurate IMO.

Quacks like a duck, etc.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#234

Post by simplerman »

seneca wrote: post #190
etripe wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't put Exxon in jail. If a corporation is a legal person with inalienable rights (as the SCOTUS seems to have decided on), but is intangible and immortal at the same time, what can you do? Any of the below: * freezing assets (=~ reclamation) * seizing accounts (=~ civil forfeiture) * suspend a business license (=~ locking them up) * introduce a revenue cap (=~ prison labour) * remove lobbyists (=~ losing vot…

> If a corporation is a legal person with inalienable rights (as the SCOTUS seems to have decided on) Please stop repeating this nonsense. Corporate Personhood is a legal idea, and does not mean a "corporation is a legal person". Without corporate personhood, you wouldn't be able to sue a company for wrongdoing if the guilty employee quit, or even enforce basic contracts. There are serious problems with corporations…

You would sue guilty employees even if they quit and move to another company. I feel that would be much better for personal responsibility.

And the best part about this would be people cannot hide behind "I am just following orders."

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#235

Post by graeme »

shawnz wrote: post #72
user-the-name wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin may or may not intentionally be a Ponzi scheme. But that doesn't matter, because functionally, there is no difference between an intentional Ponzi scheme and Bitcoin. Bitcoin trading is a negative-sum game. All winning that anyone gets comes out of the pockets of newer investors. There is no net inflow of value or money that could cover the gains people make trading, other than the money being put in by other…

That's still not a Ponzi scheme unless you are also lying to investors by telling them that the returns are coming from some kind of business venture or something. Investors willingly speculating on commodities because they think they will rise isn't a Ponzi scheme.

The possible ponzi is people claiming Bitcoin will replace the existing financial system due to its intrinsic superior qualities and will go to $1 million and beyond. The HODLers don’t believe they are merely speculating.

Of course that could be true, and people saying it may well believe it. Ponzi believed his international reply coupon scheme would actually pay out. So to some extent it will only be proveable in hindsight.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#236

Post by bobthechef »

kiba wrote: post #98
cletus wrote: post #30

Here's the one lesson I really want us to all learn from this: the only thing the rich fear is prison because prison robs them of time. Fines are just the cost of doing business. There are many other scandals: the whole subprime disaster, pollution from plants and the like where no one went to prison and people really should've.

What is this obsession with jailing people? Prison is pretty inhumane, especially in the context of a limited lifespan. Even if we're immortal, it's still inhumane. Moreover, how does making people go to prison fixes anything? It's just a way to assign punishment and blame people.

> Prison is pretty inhumane, especially in the context of a limited lifespan. Even if we're immortal, it's still inhumane.

You have a very warped view of justice. Rape isn't "inhumane"? Murdering someone isn't "inhumane"?

In the case of premeditated murder the murderer forfeits the right to life, so the death penalty, especially for especially egregious acts, is entirely just. To claim it isn't is unjust and an insult to the victim. Mercy only has meaning when the penalty is deserved and prudence will dictate whether the peantly ought to be exercised in the given circumstances given the best account of the facts and our limited knowledge (hence the need for judges who have the authority and the perspective to better adjudicate dispassionately instead of fueling some Sicilian family feud or a lynch mob that confuses envy with anger at injustice).

> Moreover, how does making people go to prison fixes anything? It's just a way to assign punishment and blame people.

Uh, yes? OBVIOUSLY, if someone is GUILTY, he DESERVES blame and punishment. I don't know why this is so difficult for you to understand or how you could possibly think this is wrong or that a world without them is preferable or even feasible. If someone has freely committed a crime, if he has chosen to commit that crime and has carried it out, then OBVIOUSLY he bears responsibility for it and is culpable for his actions.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#237

Post by squeaky-clean »

shawnz wrote: post #194
hctaw wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the nonexistent enterprise is the use of bitcoin as a medium of exchange

Bitcoin actually functions as a medium of exchange and that's not an enterprise anyway. Is there an expectation that by buying Bitcoins, you are funding the growth of a business which creates profits by using your investment, and those profits are where your investment return is coming from? If that's not the case, then it isn't a Ponzi scheme.

> Is there an expectation that by buying Bitcoins, you are funding the growth of a business which creates profits by using your investment, and those profits are where your investment return is coming from?

If you think this isn't a common viewpoint, you need to lurk on some bitcoin forums and discord servers.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#238

Post by shawnz »

saalweachter wrote: post #233
shawnz wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin actually functions as a medium of exchange and that's not an enterprise anyway. Is there an expectation that by buying Bitcoins, you are funding the growth of a business which creates profits by using your investment, and those profits are where your investment return is coming from? If that's not the case, then it isn't a Ponzi scheme.

Yeah, but ... I am constantly told that Bitcoin (et al) is the future, that it is revolutionary, that it is going to be big in some way -- that it will replace "fiat" currencies, for instance, although the exact way it is going to be big has changed over time. That some people are making money hand over fist by investing is then used as proof that it is a good investment. That the fake enterprise is just lazy meta-fi…

Misleading people about the power of a technology doesn't make something a Ponzi scheme. You need to mislead investors about the origin of their returns. Purposeful speculation isn't a Ponzi scheme even if the speculators were misled about the thing they are speculating on.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#239

Post by shawnz »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #237
shawnz wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin actually functions as a medium of exchange and that's not an enterprise anyway. Is there an expectation that by buying Bitcoins, you are funding the growth of a business which creates profits by using your investment, and those profits are where your investment return is coming from? If that's not the case, then it isn't a Ponzi scheme.

> Is there an expectation that by buying Bitcoins, you are funding the growth of a business which creates profits by using your investment, and those profits are where your investment return is coming from? If you think this isn't a common viewpoint, you need to lurk on some bitcoin forums and discord servers.

That's not the only condition though. It is not enough for some crackpot evangelists to believe that. It must be a purposeful deception in order to get the investor to give you money for something different than what you claimed.

Re: Bernie Madoff has died

#240

Post by DrBazza »

ryandrake wrote: post #141
cletus wrote: post #30

Here's the one lesson I really want us to all learn from this: the only thing the rich fear is prison because prison robs them of time. Fines are just the cost of doing business. There are many other scandals: the whole subprime disaster, pollution from plants and the like where no one went to prison and people really should've.

Corporations (which are usually the payer of fines for bad behavior) don't fear prison because they can't be physically imprisoned. You can't put Exxon in jail. And, lawmakers deliberately make it so damn hard to pierce the corporate liability veil and hold shareholders or directors personally liable for the corporation's actions. So, we need to both move more towards prison and start digging in to which actual peopl…

> So, we need to both move more towards prison and start digging in to which actual people inside bad corporations were responsible for deciding to do wrongdoing.

And that's like turkeys voting for Christmas. In most Western countries, governments, political parties and businesses are so intertwined, your member of congress/senate/parliament is probably a businessman (Trump!), or is lobbied by businesses, or the party is funded by business.

That's not to say it won't happen, but it takes something fairly seismic to make governments act.

Post reply on HN