321–330 of 336 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Crypto can work perfectly fine without a link to fiat. Funnily even stablecoins don't need fiat (see Terra's UST).
And yet, more than half of all crypto trades are linked directly to fiat by way of Tether, USDT. https://coingeek.com/terra-ust-is-now-the-biggest-decentrali...
I think a lot of people are missing the big picture here, because they're against the trucker protest. It's actually quite possible to think the trucker protest was stupid, and incredibly damaging to locals (via noise pollution and sleep deprivation), while still being pro crypto (I am). The question is not is crypto valuable because of this one protest. The question is, what happens when you DO agree with a protest…
To rewrite my common quote on this, using your phrase:
"Crypto is not about dismantling the state. It's about decoupling from the state".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't clear that just because there is a large number of something, the entire ecosystem must be worthless, which is what you originally said. You're misinterpreting my original statement and ignoring my explanation. If too many people can easily make the product, the market quickly becomes saturated ... There are not 10,000 companies listed in the stock market all producing the same type of product.
My point is that the number of cryptos/websites/stocks doesn't matter at all. A saturated market does not lead to a failed market, a saturated market just means there is demand for something. Sure, most cryptos are probably going to become worthless, but all it takes is one to work, and one that isn't easy to copy. In the stock example, maybe 9999 companies go bankrupt, but there is still a market, and whoever surviv…
Could it happen? Sure. In the same way that a monkey with a keyboard could produce a best seller. But there is absolutely zero reason to expect or believe it will happen any time soon.
But invest now to get in on the ground floor --- just in case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you see the large number of cryptocurrencies an argument supporting theoretical value going to zero? If too many people can easily make the product, the market quickly becomes saturated and the value starts to tend toward zero and people losing interest in it. Also, in this particular case the product is defective. It doesn't actually function as stated --- as a currency that is widely accepted to buy a huge v…
You're missing the idea of network effects. Yes, you an easily make a clone of Bitcoin (or other cryptos), but you cannot easily clone the network effect it has. The value of a crypto is in the network, not the code, and this value grows exponentially with the number of the people using the network (Metcalf's Law[0]). Despite the increase in total number of cryptocurrencies, the number of people using the big network…
If Elon Musk wanted to make "MuskCoin", he could and instantly have a huge number of people jump on board. He has already proven this just by meddling in the current crypto market for his own amusement.
Lots of other companies/individuals with clout and name recognition could easily do the same.
The only reason they don't --- they recognize the ultimate futility of it. Musk has even poked fun at the absurdity of it all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My point is that the number of cryptos/websites/stocks doesn't matter at all. A saturated market does not lead to a failed market, a saturated market just means there is demand for something. Sure, most cryptos are probably going to become worthless, but all it takes is one to work, and one that isn't easy to copy. In the stock example, maybe 9999 companies go bankrupt, but there is still a market, and whoever surviv…
I am basically saying that allowing anyone to create/clone money at will is an absolutely absurd way to reach a consensus on a currency. On the contrary, it is a really, really good way to avoid one. Don't take my word for it, just look at the current crypto-market. Could it happen? Sure. In the same way that a monkey with a keyboard could produce a best seller. But there is absolutely zero reason to expect or believ…
You are also ignoring network effects entirely. Number of users of Bitcoin have increased year after year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am basically saying that allowing anyone to create/clone money at will is an absolutely absurd way to reach a consensus on a currency. On the contrary, it is a really, really good way to avoid one. Don't take my word for it, just look at the current crypto-market. Could it happen? Sure. In the same way that a monkey with a keyboard could produce a best seller. But there is absolutely zero reason to expect or believ…
You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin as is being used in it's mining. Because the input energy is scarce, it is not trivial to clone as you are saying. You are also ignoring network effects entirely. Number of users of Bitcoin have increased year after year.
The cloner would have to exert the same energy to mining that Satoshi Nakamoto did/does --- zero. Others will do this for you.
But thanks for pointing out the absurdity/weakness of Bitcoin and one of the reasons why it fails as a currency. You do know there are other options for cloning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin as is being used in it's mining. Because the input energy is scarce, it is not trivial to clone as you are saying. You are also ignoring network effects entirely. Number of users of Bitcoin have increased year after year.
You'd have to exert the same amount of energy to clone Bitcoin ... The cloner would have to exert the same energy to mining that Satoshi Nakamoto did/does --- zero. Others will do this for you. But thanks for pointing out the absurdity/weakness of Bitcoin and one of the reasons why it fails as a currency. You do know there are other options for cloning.
I generally agree with you though that cloning a PoS blockchain is easy in this regard, those ones also are protected by network effects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if the chaotic noise dominates social awareness because people are simply unaware of the macro trends influencing them, or the more charitable explanation that they are aware they exist but accept they are helpless to change them. Either way, this entire ordeal has basically solidified my position that as a society we are woefully unequipped to solve any of the major problems that threaten us. People are so…
I think that there are answers out there, many coming from Stephen Kotkin, a man who destroyed his eye sight studying Stalin, who is an expert on the collapse of the Soviet Union, and who is trying to reboot the American diplomatic service. He talks about how we in the west must stop demonizing each other. We have the ability to solve our problems, but our political parties make it impossible to get the right people…
I think a lot of people are missing the big picture here, because they're against the trucker protest. It's actually quite possible to think the trucker protest was stupid, and incredibly damaging to locals (via noise pollution and sleep deprivation), while still being pro crypto (I am). The question is not is crypto valuable because of this one protest. The question is, what happens when you DO agree with a protest…
Fully agree. I too dislike the protest, the methods, the cause, the goal. Yet I see the benefit in something that operates separate from the state. To rewrite my common quote on this, using your phrase: "Crypto is not about dismantling the state. It's about decoupling from the state".
Love it, I think I'll be using this saying from now on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're missing the idea of network effects. Yes, you an easily make a clone of Bitcoin (or other cryptos), but you cannot easily clone the network effect it has. The value of a crypto is in the network, not the code, and this value grows exponentially with the number of the people using the network (Metcalf's Law[0]). Despite the increase in total number of cryptocurrencies, the number of people using the big network…
Just like cloning a crypo, it'd be trivial to make a new Twitter, but extremely difficult to gain the same level of network effect. If Elon Musk wanted to make "MuskCoin", he could and instantly have a huge number of people jump on board. He has already proven this just by meddling in the current crypto market for his own amusement. Lots of other companies/individuals with clout and name recognition could easily do t…