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

The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

rorodi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 429 posts

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#411

Post by arcticbull »

TigeriusKirk wrote: post #375
gonehome wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really try to resist being drawn into flame bait. > "Remember the golden rule of blockchain: except in the case of regulatory arbitrage, grift and crime, if you think a blockchain is a better solution to a problem than any classical solution - you either don't know enough about crypto or you don't know enough about the problem." There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overco…

>There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. I'm tempted to start keeping track of how many hundreds of negative comments about crypto HN generates each day, every day. It doesn't really come across as confidence to me.

HN is quite a bit softer on average on crypto than the broader audience. There's a small but confidently vocal minority of us keeping the light on for sanity.

You find me one thing, just one thing, that crypto is better at than a traditional solution and I'll be all over it. 14 years and counting. 0 killer apps.

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#412

Post by SergeAx »

_xnmw wrote: post #202

For those who believe "crypto is too big to fail", or the genie is out of the bottle, or that crypto concepts have become so engrained and popular that it's not possible to stop, I'd like to point out that Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scam lasted for 30+ years. People built entire lives on his very professional-seeming "business". Scams can go on for a very long time, and very large numbers of people can build their whole l…

Define "scam" then. I am 100% sure I can buy drugs, fake IDs, CP and other illegal goods and services with crypto, how's that a scam?

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#413

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

selestify wrote: post #408
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a distinction without a difference. I'm saying the forged art is valuable because there is a cost to produce it, and the JPG isn't because there effectively isn't a cost to produce it. The NFT took work to produce, sure, but it's just a number with some mathematical relationship to other numbers and means absolutely nothing without other systems agreeing that it means something. It creates work to be done wher…

> That's a distinction without a difference. That's where you're mistaken. An NFT is distinct from the work that the NFT is tied to, which might not necessarily be digital. You can copy a Picasso, but no matter how good your copy is, you can't copy the "original" quality of a Picasso. That's all an NFT is, representing the "originaL" quality of something. The worth (or lack thereof) of copies is completely irrelevant…

> An NFT is distinct from the work that the NFT is tied to, which might not necessarily be digital.

Yep. Which raises the question: what exactly does the NFT provide? Is the work it points to in any way lesser through its absence? If no, then why does the NFT exist?

> You can copy a Picasso, but no matter how good your copy is, you can't copy the "original" quality of a Picasso.

There's a long philosophical argument to be made here involving the ship of Theseus, the teletransportation paradox, and frankly thousands of years of philosophy of identity. Let me attempt a short version: if you have two identical paintings, and lack external information as to their origin, can not either one (or both) be said to be the 'true' painting? If so, then what value is there in the information that 'proves' one is the 'original'? The origin-information, an NFT in this case, is a construction, an arbitrary assurance. What value has an NFT that points at nothing?

> The worth (or lack thereof) of copies is completely irrelevant.

I think we agree about what NFT's are, so the only real disagreement is about their value. Precisely because of the point above, I think we would both agree that their value is completely divorced from the value of what they point to, right? So the NFT's value must stand on its own without regard to the work it points to, right? Therefore, saying it represents the 'originalness' of a work cannot be where its value comes from because that is a derivation of value from the value of the work.

I assert that the value of an NFT is effectively 0. Anyone can make any NFT they want, and it might be unique, but uniqueness is not inherently valuable. Here's a UUID v4: 6dee29bc-8798-4560-ba13-de94bac69333. I generated it just now and it is the first and theoretically only time that UUID will ever be generated. Since I have generated this UUID, I have gone ahead and signed it with a private key and thus claim ownership of it. Here's a pastebin to the public key: https://pastebin.com/ddVJxvck and the signed UUID: https://pastebin.com/0MweD9qN. This is effectively an NFT. How much would you like to pay me to sign a certificate of ownership transfer to you?

Summing all up: The work that went into the creation of a thing is all that has value. NFTs can be created for basically free by literally anyone who wants to and therefore they have no value. Claims that an NFTs value comes from it pointing to something are bunk as we both agree the value of what it points to is irrelevant.

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#414

Post by gonehome »

arcticbull wrote: post #411
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's a real possibility here that you're way overconfident and wrong and this overconfidence will blind you from a lot of interesting stuff that's going on. I'm tempted to start keeping track of how many hundreds of negative comments about crypto HN generates each day, every day. It doesn't really come across as confidence to me.

HN is quite a bit softer on average on crypto than the broader audience. There's a small but confidently vocal minority of us keeping the light on for sanity. You find me one thing, just one thing, that crypto is better at than a traditional solution and I'll be all over it. 14 years and counting. 0 killer apps.

People have mentioned things to you [0], you ignore them and repeat this phrase.

So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion.

You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error.

[0]: getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#415

Post by asdfsd234234444 »

notahacker wrote: post #366
asdfsd234234444 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go for a higher quality replica? https://www.marcalexanderart.com/reproductions/ "own a museum quality reproduction of a great master’s painting that is indistinguishable from the original"

Not gonna lie, I think an inauthentic art reproduction is going to set me back more than an minting an inauthentic claim to own a gif on a blockchain. It'll look better on my wall though, which is why I'd consider commissioning it. For related reasons, I suspect that whilst more people would flock to see the actual Sistine Chapel ceiling than one I commissioned for my living room, I'd still have an easier time wowing…

I think you countered your own point - the value is in verifiable authenticity - whether that be an authority (museum), certificate, or the blockchain.

For example, consider a baseball or other trading card. Can be easily replicated/printed - yet certified authentic cards have value much more value. Why?

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#416

Post by arcticbull »

gonehome wrote: post #414
arcticbull wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is quite a bit softer on average on crypto than the broader audience. There's a small but confidently vocal minority of us keeping the light on for sanity. You find me one thing, just one thing, that crypto is better at than a traditional solution and I'll be all over it. 14 years and counting. 0 killer apps.

People have mentioned things to you [0], you ignore them and repeat this phrase. So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion. You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error. [0]: getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one

> getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one

Do you have a concrete example that wouldn't (a) be suitably handled by Wise, Xoom or a wire transfer and (b) isn't out of a sanctioned country and (b) isn't out of a country where the transfer fee would be prohibitive? If so, could you quantify?

Is it even good for this? You have to buy the coins from someone else, meaning if you did it domestically you're still net the same level of welfare. If you traded them internationally, you can just buy USD.

This is yet another hand-wavey claim, and what I asked for was something concrete, tangible, measurable.

> You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error.

2008 to 2022. Just rounding by a couple months.

> So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion.

I have no interest in slapping crypto on the back when it hasn't done anything but crime, grift and regulatory arbitrage. Bitcoin is the official currency of the alt-right and yes, it's now older than your average high schooler. [1] Just one, concrete application is all I ask.

[1] https://chicago.suntimes.com/2021/9/30/22703200/bitcoin-cryp...

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#417

Post by gonehome »

arcticbull wrote: post #416
gonehome wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have mentioned things to you [0], you ignore them and repeat this phrase. So despite what you say, you will not be “all over it”. You have no interest in changing your mind or in engaging in genuine discussion. You won’t even update “14yrs” which is just a clear factual error. [0]: getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one

> getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one Do you have a concrete example that wouldn't (a) be suitably handled by Wise, Xoom or a wire transfer and (b) isn't out of a sanctioned country and (b) isn't out of a country where the transfer fee would be prohibitive? If so, could you quantify? Is it even good for this? You have to buy the coins from someone else, meaning if you did it domestically you're still net…

Ukraine: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tatianakoffman/2020/06/13/why-b...

Stored wealth, memorized seed words and regenerated on the other side.

There was also an interview with someone relying on BTC in Venezuela too because their currency is worse.

You’re rounding by multiple years, especially if you consider ETH.

Also: https://www.matthuang.com/bitcoin_for_the_open_minded_skepti...

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#418

Post by arcticbull »

gonehome wrote: post #417
arcticbull wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> getting wealth out of a corrupt country for one Do you have a concrete example that wouldn't (a) be suitably handled by Wise, Xoom or a wire transfer and (b) isn't out of a sanctioned country and (b) isn't out of a country where the transfer fee would be prohibitive? If so, could you quantify? Is it even good for this? You have to buy the coins from someone else, meaning if you did it domestically you're still net…

Ukraine: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tatianakoffman/2020/06/13/why-b... Stored wealth, memorized seed words and regenerated on the other side. There was also an interview with someone relying on BTC in Venezuela too because their currency is worse. You’re rounding by multiple years, especially if you consider ETH. Also: https://www.matthuang.com/bitcoin_for_the_open_minded_skepti...

> Stored wealth, memorized seed words and regenerated on the other side.

Of course its possible for one or two people to benefit but net net the Ukranians either (a) traded amongst themselves in which case the net welfare stayed the exact same or (b) they traded with people abroad in which case they could have chosen literally any asset on earth, many of which outperformed Bitcoin and other cryptos.

> There was also an interview with someone relying on BTC in Venezuela too because their currency is worse.

An anecdote is not a substitute for data, and Venezuela decided to dollarize, not bitcoinize. 66% of transactions in Venezuela are USD denominated now due to a groundswell of popular support. [1] They didn't bitcoinize. Because the dollar is better.

> You’re rounding by multiple years, especially if you consider ETH.

I'm rounding by a few months. That there are recent developments doesn't roll forward the clock on launch day. The iPhone launched at the same time as Bitcoin. That's what a killer product looks like.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-13/venezuela...

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#419

Post by bglusman »

Jeema101 wrote: post #346
bglusman wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you may have just also described fractional reserve banking? that is literally where much of the money supply comes from. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking

Except that they aren't banks, and so there's no lender of last resort to backstop them. [1] There can't be any assurance that depositors would get all of their money back in the event of a bank run if the money isn't backed by actual dollars or a lender of last resort. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lender_of_last_resort

Well… I’m not expert on DeFi or anything but until the 20th century banks existed and didn’t have this right? But yes, there were runs on banks… but there are no runs on CDs right, and that’s a banking product also? Why not? Well, they’re contractually wrapped up for a time period. What if all DeFi lending is/was similar and crypto contracts locked them up for set periods… would that be an OK and legitimate system then? If not why not?

Re: The biggest crypto lending company is a ponzi scheme

#420

Post by gonehome »

arcticbull wrote: post #418
gonehome wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tatianakoffman/2020/06/13/why-b... Stored wealth, memorized seed words and regenerated on the other side. There was also an interview with someone relying on BTC in Venezuela too because their currency is worse. You’re rounding by multiple years, especially if you consider ETH. Also: https://www.matthuang.com/bitcoin_for_the_open_minded_skepti...

> Stored wealth, memorized seed words and regenerated on the other side. Of course its possible for one or two people to benefit but net net the Ukranians either (a) traded amongst themselves in which case the net welfare stayed the exact same or (b) they traded with people abroad in which case they could have chosen literally any asset on earth, many of which outperformed Bitcoin and other cryptos. > There was also…

It’s pointless to continue - you asked for “just one thing” then come up with reasons why the use case I gave doesn’t count. It wasn’t about trading, it was about being able to store value without needing trust in a central authority.

It’s hard to get dollars in Venezuela which is why this guy was relying on BTC. I never claimed BTC was superior to the dollar.

The iPhone is a product, Bitcoin (really blockchain and programmable money more broadly) is more akin to the web in 1996. It’s a protocol for money.

You can believe what you want, the nice thing about economic bets is it doesn’t matter.

Post reply on HN