Bitcoin is a Ponzi • Hacker News Board

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#391

Post by TawandaMoyo » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:34 AM UTC

glenvdb wrote: post #51

A lot of the "Common Objections" relate to the REASONS people choose to own Bitcoin and how those cases make it a Ponzi. There are many different reasons to own Bitcoin, however the author seems to only view it through the lens of someone living in a wealthy and developed country with financial stability. The properties of it being difficult/impossible to confiscate and its privacy make it valuable in oppressive regi…

Thanks for pointing this out. People have different reasons why they believe in bitcoin (and other cryptos). Where I live the government has in the past 20 years wiped out citizens' savings at least 3 times, arbitrarily, without any notice. In such a situation using bitcoin, regardless of the risk/skepticism, is a far better alternative than having all your money disappear on the whims and or experiments of politicians. Once I get sufficiently knowledgeable about cryptos I will happily take my chances, and I'm sure many in my situation will see it that way.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#392

Post by mey » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:34 AM UTC

I think the author misses one service that Bitcoin provides (that is referenced many times) which is to transact. The movement of transactions on the ledger is the value that Bitcoin (and others like it) provide.

Now it is absolutely shit at that job. Cost per transaction, transaction throughput, time to assurance a transaction won't be rolled back, all make Visa/Mastercard look amazing except for certain business domains. As such people offer it up as an investment, and that is the reality the average person engages. Like the gold rush, the people making money are the ones selling shovels (as pointed out in the article).

Does that make it a Ponzi scheme? I am not an economist, but I don't think so.

A horrible investment? I refuse to deal with crypto, volatility and environmental concerns are my primary reasons.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#393

Post by reidjs » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:35 AM UTC

pishpash wrote: post #323

MelonTree wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got involved in bitcoin after being blackballed from the (US) financial world while for 2-3 months while I was "investigated" in the most dystopianly opaque way possible. One day I lost the ability to transact. A few months later I got it back. Had it not been for good friends who could cover my expenses, I could have easily ended up homeless. And the most shocking part of it all, was that I was merely collateral d…

Wouldn't that only work if you had places (like your landlord) taking Bitcoin off the blockchain directly for payment? Otherwise, transacting still requires the cooperation of intermediaries subject to sanctions. Maybe you can launder through a friend, but... it doesn't seem any easier.

With localbitcoin and similar exchanges you can convert the btc to usd peer to peer with strangers.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#394

Post by jspaetzel » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:36 AM UTC

dvt wrote: post #61

People use BTC/ETH/etc. in exchange for goods . I mean, I'm not a fan of cryptocurrency, but calling it a Ponzi scheme is just wrong. There are plenty of shitcoins out there that are purely pump and dumps, but it seems like BTC is here to stay.

Every Ponzi scheme seems like it's here to stay, right up until it's not.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#395

Post by arcticbull » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:36 AM UTC

koonsolo wrote: post #363

arcticbull wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article literally covers each of those cases and explains exactly why those are not Ponzi schemes while Bitcoin is ([edit] under "Common Objections" - which should really read "Common Whataboutisms"). > By that definition, stocks too are ponzis. No. Stocks have an external source of revenue, namely the profit that the company makes by selling its products and services to customers (not investors); and these profi…

Gold doesn't have a source of revenue.

The argument is that as a commodity that is consumed to produce jewelry (52%) and industrial (12%) that there is baseline demand for it, and thus it does have intrinsic value. I don't consider it a worthwhile investment, however.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#396

Post by Closi » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:36 AM UTC

dmoy wrote: post #312

liamwire wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per any transaction, regardless of size.

What the shit? It costs $5 to spend any amount of Bitcoin? Is that for real? (I genuinely don't know, that just sounds so high)

It depends on the time you make the transaction and how fast you want the transaction to be confirmed.

If you don’t pay enough it can take hours for your coffee to be paid for.

So every time you buy a coffee with Bitcoin the transaction fee is different and sometimes will cost more than the coffee itself.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#397

Post by fnord77 » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:36 AM UTC

MelonTree wrote: post #161

glenvdb wrote: post #51

A lot of the "Common Objections" relate to the REASONS people choose to own Bitcoin and how those cases make it a Ponzi. There are many different reasons to own Bitcoin, however the author seems to only view it through the lens of someone living in a wealthy and developed country with financial stability. The properties of it being difficult/impossible to confiscate and its privacy make it valuable in oppressive regi…

I got involved in bitcoin after being blackballed from the (US) financial world while for 2-3 months while I was "investigated" in the most dystopianly opaque way possible. One day I lost the ability to transact. A few months later I got it back. Had it not been for good friends who could cover my expenses, I could have easily ended up homeless. And the most shocking part of it all, was that I was merely collateral d…

> a persons ability to transact while not quite a human right, isn't too far from it either.

it should absolutely be a human right in this age.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#398

Post by arthurcolle » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:36 AM UTC

vkou wrote: post #74

arthurcolle wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blame financial news media, things like Fortune magazine's list of new crypto billionaires. The author of this blog post's claim that 99.99% of people in crypto are only participating because of expectations of future profit is unsourced and a fiction that he has created based on preconceived notions. Don't participate if you don't want - I like participating in a system that isn't being tracked by agencies especiall…

> Blame financial news media, things like Fortune magazine's list of new crypto billionaires. The crypto financial news community was writing about this long before Fortune picked it up.

financial news media is a superset of the crypto financial news media; my statement remains true

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#399

Post by DeathArrow » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:37 AM UTC

>By that definition, stocks too are ponzis. No. Stocks have an external source of revenue, namely the profit that the company makes by selling its products and services to customers (not investors); and these profits eventually return to the investors through dividends or cash buybacks.

There are companies that never made any profit yet their shares increased in value. There are companies who made some small profits but their shared increased much more because there are high expectations.

By the definition in the article any asset which can be speculated is part of a Ponzi scheme: land, stocks, bonds.

If you buy and sell land, increasing its price, without other means to derive value of that land, such as agriculture or rent, it fits the definition of a Ponzi scheme.

Re: Bitcoin is a Ponzi

#400

Post by graeme » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 5:38 AM UTC

luka-birsa wrote: post #310

Why are such articles constantly popping up on HN? It's clear that the HN crowd does not like Bitcoin. So why keep reiterating similar arguments all over? There is zero utility in the article shared. It states some anti crypto views and that's it. Even the author concedes that this is according to his own definition and not based on real life legal tests (which have of course shown that Bitcoin is not a ponzi). Just…

You don’t seem to have reflected on the article. If it’s wrong, surely it would be trivial to rebut even one of its points.

> which have of course shown that Bitcoin is not a ponzi

What are you referring to here? This would be a rebuttal if it exists, but to my knowledge no such thing does

> Just let Crypto users be

This is your main point of substance. But as another user pointed out, the collapse of the Albanian ponzi started a war and devastated a country.

Bitcoin, if it is the ponzi it appears to be, is the biggest ponzi in history.

It is unwise to merely leave ponzis alone. They’re illegal for a reason