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

On anti-crypto toxicity

blog.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 734 posts

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#511

Post by scottLobster »

n_io wrote: post #487
scottLobster wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the government told you you're not a person, would that hold? Governments have always had the ability to dictate who is a citizen and who isn't. Someone born in Angola is not protected by or subject to the US Constitution. > To me your saying nothing's money unless the government says it is. Now you're learning! Granted in a democracy the people have a say in what governments do, so if you convince enough people…

Quoted post unavailable.

I actually keep about 1% of my non-retirement investments in bitcoin as a speculative commodity.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#513

Post by JumpCrisscross »

reedjosh wrote: post #505
n_io wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the money in your bank account a real store of value? Do you not notice what’s been happening to it at an accelerated pace over the last 30 years? I’m not arguing for bitcoin either way. But I implore you to take a hard look at your definition of real value in a system with inherent inflation that forces you to speculate in order to preserve any “real value.”

> inherent inflation that forces you to speculate in order to preserve any “real value.” Wow, also this! Say inflation is 8.5%, and you're holding an ounce of gold, then that gold raises by 8.5% in kind, you are still losing value as now you have to pay taxes on the 8.5% gained even though you didn't really gain anything.

> inflation is 8.5%, and you're holding an ounce of gold, then that gold raises by 8.5% in kind

Gold is volatile in real terms [1]. If inflation is 8.5%, your gold might be worth 10% more, 100% more or 90% less.

[1] https://goldprice.org/inflation-adjusted-gold-price.html

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#514

Post by JumpCrisscross »

Aicy wrote: post #437
scottLobster wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin will only be "sound money" when I can pay my taxes in it. Or at least pay for my oil change. Sure it's artificially limited in quantity. Great! Doesn't make it money. It's a commodity like any other.

This was fhe promise of the gold standard before the world wars. The gold standard would force governments to be financially disciplined, right? Wrong, as soon as governments needed to drop the gold standard they did it. Why wouldn't they do the same with the bitcoin standard?

> gold standard would force governments to be financially disciplined, right?

This is such a weird belief. Is the claim that prior to the 20th century there were no wars of conquest or colonies? No kings and countries running up ruinous debt?

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#515

Post by dmitriid »

______-_-______ wrote: post #345
tablespoon wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People shitting on crypto, while sitting on their ass without addressing the problems in other ways are doing society a disservice. But cryptocurrency doesn't address any real problems. The claims that it does are mostly BS and marketing. The problems cryptocurrency solves are ones that are created by holding to peculiar ideologies and/or speculating about problems that haven't happened and may never happen. The on…

Crypto has addressed real problems for Ukraine's military. > “In a situation like this, where the national bank is not fully operating, crypto is helping to perform fast transfers, to make it very quick and get results almost immediately,” https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/technology/bitcoin-ukrain... Is this BS and marketing?

> Is this BS and marketing?

A lot of that money has been withdrawn via an exchange registered in an offshore. My bet is that someone who set it up has profited nicely during the war.

Has it actually helped Ukraine? Who knows.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#516

Post by WorldMaker »

loceng wrote: post #381
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bootstrapping a new cryptocurrency where 90% of the coins go to relatively few early adopters is the worst possible way to fix financial inequality. The crypto holders would love if the world switched to using the cryptocurrency they’re invested in because it would make them extraordinarily wealthy relative to the average person buying in late. I don’t understand how anyone can honestly suggest that a gradual changeo…

While trying to not regularly call the majority of cryptocurrencies (the term currency misappropriated) an MLM-Ponzi scheme, I've started to realize that an easier or perhaps better way to state the problem with them is to use one of the key values that is virtue signalled against them: it's claimed that Bitcoin et al are anti-inflation, when in fact the inflation is just built into it - and only benefit the early/ea…

Yeah, one of the things cryptocurrency supporters often claim is that the coin pools were generally designed to be fixed size and "deflationary" as a goal (at least from certain points of view), but deflation as a goal is just as bad as inflation as a goal. Too much deflation tends to spiral [1] and there are plenty of examples of real world economies in history torn apart by deflation.

I don't know what an equitable monetary policy would be, but I know that intentionally deflationary currencies look nothing like it.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/deflationary-spiral.asp

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#517

Post by hef19898 »

mr_spothawk wrote: post #439
hef19898 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most trade questions, and that's what Ukraine is using the funds for, international finance is a solved problem. When it comes to tax evasion, large scale fraud, money laundering and so on it is definitely not. Unfortunately, crypto is only making the unsolved problems worse. And regarding the case with the guy in Nigeria: How much access do people in the developing world have to crypto? And don't start with the…

HSBC? WellsFargo? what are you talking about crypto-related fraud without even a nod to these enormous organizations that have been convicted (multiple times) of fraud?

I'll add Deutsche Bank, Cumex and other scandals. That's why I said fraud isn't solved in finance.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#518

Post by reedjosh »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #513
reedjosh wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> inherent inflation that forces you to speculate in order to preserve any “real value.” Wow, also this! Say inflation is 8.5%, and you're holding an ounce of gold, then that gold raises by 8.5% in kind, you are still losing value as now you have to pay taxes on the 8.5% gained even though you didn't really gain anything.

> inflation is 8.5%, and you're holding an ounce of gold, then that gold raises by 8.5% in kind Gold is volatile in real terms [1]. If inflation is 8.5%, your gold might be worth 10% more, 100% more or 90% less. [1] https://goldprice.org/inflation-adjusted-gold-price.html

That isn't the point. In fact you're basically illustrating my point. Without taking risk, you will lose the value of your money.

If you had some perfect asset (not gold since the volatility distracts you) that increased in dollars exactly as much as inflation, then you would still lose value to taxation even though you only gained as much as inflation.

In the real world, yes, no perfect asset like that exists, so it's worse than that. You have to risk your earned value to keep your earned value over time.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#519

Post by kuschku »

mr_spothawk wrote: post #495
kuschku wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What?? The parent was talking about the lightning network... which is built on top of the bitcoin node network. Yes, but bitcoin is so volatile that you can’t keep money for daily usage in it. You can only use it as long-term investment or ultra-short-term wallet. The regular usage – storing money for somewhere between one and 30 days – is really painful with bitcoin.

It's hard to not talk past people about these things... i'm really struggling to understand what you're trying to communicate. Are you saying that keeping some amount of bitcoin tied up in a LN channel is painful? Or are you saying that holding bitcoin for 1-30 days is "regular usage" ? Also, you completely ignored the point about running a node.

> Or are you saying that holding bitcoin for 1-30 days is "regular usage" ?

Holding money for 1-30 days is regular usage. You get paid, you spend it over a month on wages and expenses.

Bitcoin originally promised to be usable for that. Some companies actually paid you in BTC, some stores actually allowed you to pay with BTC. The original goal was to use BTC like a checking account.

Lightning is great at replacing the BTC network itself for transactions, but it doesn’t help much at allowing BTC to accomplish this original task of matching or exceeding fiat money in actual day to day usability.

Re: On anti-crypto toxicity

#520

Post by rvz »

______-_-______ wrote: post #278
bombcar wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretending a system that has specific names for various scams will somehow reduce inequality is hilarious. I feel people think “if everyone had bought Bitcoin when it was cheap, everyone would be rich now” and then think that Safemoon rugpull #42053 will somehow do it.

Quoted post unavailable.

Not sure why you are downvoted since here on HN, a bad egg soils the bunch. The logic with them is as follows with an example of a fallacy with cars and the environment:

'The majority of cars worldwide are not electric. They are all petrol and diesel cars. That means that ALL cars are bad for the environment and that will not change and thus should be all banned.'

Not all cryptocurrency projects are scams, just like not all cars are burning up the planet.

The absolutism towards whether if all cryptocurrency projects will go away due to a 'bUnCH OF Scam PrOjEctS' or 'it's ALl a scAm™' is just as silly as suggesting that all cryptocurrency projects are guaranteed to survive, 'becAuse iT is the FutURE, bRO™' or 'JUst WaiT fOr ThIs PrOJEct ReAL sooN™'.

I'll tell you that both extremes are incorrect. That is even before accounting for regulations getting involved.

Post reply on HN