571–580 of 700 posts
Some random thoughts - bullshit jobs is a term for jobs that have not yet been automated. Jeff Bezos pays a Uber driver to turn a steering wheel until the robot can, and he pays a Amazon Project Manager to make graphs until the Perl Script can. - such jobs don't exist because the "elite" are scared of proletariat, they exist because organisations are badly designed hurriedly put together and really hard to dismantle.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Miners could make a profit at $1/coin. The issue is that profit comes from somewhere. And that somewhere is new money being put into BTC. Hence, BTC is negative cashflow.
Help me here. All databases are negative cashflow. They only 'cost', don't generate 'revenue' by themselves. This is true of ACH mechanism to transfer funds from one bank account to another. Does that make USD negative cashflow? Does the cost of maintaining this ACH system affect the price of USD v/s GBP? The value provided by a database such as BTC is that it provides a record of 'who owns what at what point of time…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is there a there there without an underlying token that's gone up XX% in the last N months and everyone hopes will still go up XX% in the next N months? Alternatively, even simpler: where is the money coming from ? A bunch of people playing a game are a closed system, and no value is created by playing the game. If the only reason why players are earning money from this game is because more people are continually b…
If the game were actually fun, there could be money coming in from players who value the fun more than making money. Axie may have an element to this, but I hear it's not fun. The term for these players is "whales." They are willing to spend a lot for fast progression and domination. A game which pays Filipinos may have money coming in from a well-off player in China. There could be schemes where whales hire Filipino…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fiat is created by banks - by originating loans. A bank does not actually need to have that money to create the loan - it is not transferred from somewhere else, it is just that the bank's balance sheet expands. There are rules on how much a bank is allowed to create, as you might imagine. The BTC system does not create money - you can follow the creation of a coin system to its eventual destruction and discover that…
> You will know this because the 'price' of BTC will be zero. To be exact in this scenario, the 'price' of BTC will still be the price of the last trade in cryto exchanges. The trading volume however, will be 0, and there will no demand on the bid/ask. Hence you're stuck with BTC you can't offload.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah but a change in the price of BTC does not in fact create any value - it just means that that $100 now corresponds to less BTC. You can profit from that fluctuation, by being on the right side of the cash exchange at two separate points in time. Somebody else will be on the wrong side of that exchange (well, in aggregate anyway - there will be many somebodies on either side) and will suffer a corresponding loss. Si…
The same (incorrect) reasoning applies to literally anything you don't physically use including USD, equities, gold, land, etc.
By the way his argument is that any absolute value ascribed to a currency is arbitrary or rather that there is no correct number.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently the original idle game (according to wikipedia at least) although modern idle games are probably influenced by Cookie Clicker and others as well. I've occasionally been tempted to play Idle Champions which seems similar.
I'm pretty into the idle/incremental game concept, though they're rarely implemented to my taste. It's difficult to quantify what makes a good one, but my favorite is Universal Paperclips. https://www.decisionproblem.com/paperclips/index2.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The economy is zero sum. The early investors are the people that bought in early and they cash out by selling to the later investors. The “legitimate business” claim is Axie itself and the claim that it can both reward investors who hold and rent Axies as well as pay people to play the game. An idea that only works if more people keep putting money in. To further this claim Axies developers make an awful lot of noise…
I'm not sure about this, but I think the correct term might be "negative sum." The winners gain less than the losers lost for the reasons you mentioned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I completely agree with you, but I’m wondering if you could help me debate the counter argument: “The same is true of stocks, if people decide to stop putting money in, no money comes out” It comes up whenever I make a point similar to yours above, and I haven’t had a good answer for it
Right. So exactly the same is true of stocks when it comes to trading existing stock. The key difference is the creation of stock - IPOs. The company uses that money they get from the IPO and invests it into the business, which results in profits, which they give out as dividends. There's no such mechanism in cryptocurrency. Unfortunately the other side has a good response to this - if the dollar value of buybacks+di…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the most crucial question about everything crypto-related. Because it turns out every crypto market is a negative-sum game. If you invest, you are guaranteed to lose on average. If you do happen to win, your gains are coming out of the pocket of someone else who lost even more. The price of the token in question doesn't enter into this at all. It can rise, fall, anything. It is still a negative-sum game, but…
> Because it turns out every crypto market is a negative-sum game. [Citation needed] You can't just hand wave and assume this to be true. If the world's major investors decide that crypto represents a store of value, then that's a positive-sum game for crypto. If stablecoins transacted on smart contract chains generate demand for Ethereum to pay for the network transaction fees, then that's a positive-sum game for cr…