161–170 of 699 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You have not been looking hard if you haven't the crypto fawns here.
No, actually this has been a known thing for years. There have even been topics asking why HN hates crypto so much, which appear every six months or so.
With China turning against bitcoin (regardless of their motivation), the latter category has even more reason to think cryptocurrency is a lousy way to fleece people for your personal gain. You don't have to be ethical to be against crypto, you can be a scammer yourself and simply be unsatisfied with the quality of the exploit being proposed.
"There is no future in this" is a fine reason to be against a thing even if you have no ethical qualms about exploiting people's foolishness. You have to be able to build a plausible case for why somebody ought to buy into it, and that just got observably harder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN has a well known hatred for anything crypto. I’m not really sure why, to be honest. Very odd that an authoritarian action by an extremely centralized government is being applauded on here.
Even bad people can do good things. It's not strange at all that we can applaud an action of an authoritarian regime. Xi is an evil dictator, but I think this particular action is positive for the world.
But this is the authoritarian regime being authoritarian. HN isn't praising them doing something unusual, this is authoritarian China acting in its most normal manner. It wouldn't be surprising if Xi dictated this course of action either, although if he did I'm sure it was with support of China's wealthy elites.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I won't downplay the environmental consequences of PoW, but the actual reason so many governments are speeding the push against crypto might be related to a future of high inflation and high gov debt. It would be the perfect storm for mainstream crypto adoption.
Nonsense. Why would any sane person move a large part of their assets into something as volatile as crypto? If you want to protect yourself against inflation, buy real estate or equities if your time horizon is long enough. Even fixed income once rates are a bit better. But for the average person please stay clear of crypto!
Why would any sane person invest in real estate? You have maintenance costs, property taxes, it's not liquid and you can go years with little growth. Not to mention if your area see's hard economic times (i.e. Detroit), the chance of a rebound is slim.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is a bit annoying that you assume that people critical of cryptocurrencies and specifically Bitcoin's environmental footprint are uneducated about the issues. It is not a myth. BTC's environmental footprint is preposterous. It's estimated that the network currently runs at 165 TWh/a, or around 19 GW, which means that one transaction uses around 5 GJ or 1500 kWh, and produces 800 kg of CO2, and 250 g of electronic…
Give me a break. Power consumption numbers are completely meaningless in this argument. Power usage does not correlate directly to CO2 emissions. Crypto can and does run on renewables. If we were serious about fixing climate change we'd stop all air traffic tomorrow. In reality, the climate issue is just a convenient political bludgeon.
I hope the rest of world follows. There is nothing more volatile than a decentralised crypto currency. The amount of people making a profit from it is less than 5% and energy consumption is beyond acceptable. Crypto as a tech to serve something different is totally fine of course.
I hope the rest of world follows. There is nothing more volatile than a decentralised crypto currency. The amount of people making a profit from it is less than 5% and energy consumption is beyond acceptable. Crypto as a tech to serve something different is totally fine of course.
Exactly. It's literally just burning the world's resources just for the modern equivalent of beanie babies For those who genuinely want decentralised currency, there's so many more efficient options
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing wrong with the fundamentals of your argument, but growth can’t be unlimited. Eventually it’s starts slowing down, then those complacent middle class will start being less complacent and start demanding more freedom. I think it’s reasonable to say the CCP will keep their grip on power for as long as they can continue delivering wealth to the middle class, and lifting those in poverty into the middle class. Wha…
That newly freedom-thirsty middle class could be simply brutally suppressed by an automated police force, powered by AI-driven surveillance. The CCP is a long-term thinking government, I'm sure they are at least considering how it would work.
Not saying it won’t happen, but I don’t think it’s a clear cut as you make it, and I think the CCP are smart enough to know that. They already do an astonishingly good job of treading the line between an authoritarian government that exploits it population for wealth, and one that empowers its populations for productivity and even greater wealth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've noticed this quite a bit, and I don't understand it. People keep writing articles and saying things amounting to 'it just won't last forever'. But the reason is, because it just won't, totalitarian governments don't last. Why wouldn't it? Strong central government. Clear economic and social goals with the ends justifying whatever unethical means. A complacent middle and upper class satiated by enough new wealth…
Nothing wrong with the fundamentals of your argument, but growth can’t be unlimited. Eventually it’s starts slowing down, then those complacent middle class will start being less complacent and start demanding more freedom. I think it’s reasonable to say the CCP will keep their grip on power for as long as they can continue delivering wealth to the middle class, and lifting those in poverty into the middle class. Wha…
They will not start demanding more freedom (only a small minority will do that). They will become increasingly agitated and demand the kind of economic progress they had before, which the CCP won't be able to deliver (the easy, fast, low-debt growth has largely been saturated).
Specifically the CCP | people-of-China socioeconomic pact is based on the country continuing to deliver massive economic gains to the bulk of the population.
Xi has begun a new cultural revolution (just ahead of the curve) because he recognizes it's going to be required to stomp down on the population in order for the CCP to retain its position, as the easy economic gains are well over. The leadership of the CCP recognizes what's inevitable about their context: they either had to let go of power increasingly, or they have to become more totalitarian, as the growth pact begins to falter. What waits for China the next 30 years, is significant demographic erosion, slow growth and epic persistent debt problems (which doesn't mean they aren't going to be a superpower, they are).
*$50k bitcoin/gold if bought today