21–30 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>so your boring old index fund might go down when crypto goes down I need someone to explain to me how my S&P 500 blackrock ishares are going to die from crypto. I don't think FAANG, Berkshire, Exxon and Pfitzer are going to notice if all of crypto dropped to zero right now.
How much of FAANG's customers would cease to exist and stop spending if crypto went to zero?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is not safe to say, but rvz likes to keep saying it. Yes it is. Assuming you have read the whole article, it is safe to say that it has failed in its original purpose. I and and many others keep saying it because it is an irrefutable fact after many years of its existence. In the case of the author on Bitcoin and the contents of this article, he has made that totally clear. Hence, can one use it for on-chain pay…
Just because you keep repeating something doesn't make it true, same goes for your statements. Tick-tock next block ...
My 'statements' and that 'something' that I am repeating are based on the contents of the article. That is why I am assuming you also have read all of it before commenting here and some of the author's previous articles.
So when are you going to refute them and answer a simple question?
Or did you just rush here to comment knowing that you cannot answer the question and just repeat 'Tick-tock next block' after the next commenter? Is that why you cannot refute me or the article?
200 Billion in crypto wiped out in 24 hrs is bound to cause ripple effects in traditional finance as well. "Crypto has at least started to work its way into the real financial system. Some traditional investors also own crypto; if their crypto goes down they might have to sell regular stuff. Some public companies are exposed to crypto (because they are crypto exchanges, because they have levered crypto holdings, etc.…
>so your boring old index fund might go down when crypto goes down I need someone to explain to me how my S&P 500 blackrock ishares are going to die from crypto. I don't think FAANG, Berkshire, Exxon and Pfitzer are going to notice if all of crypto dropped to zero right now.
Matt Levine writes well about it: [ https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-05-10/anothe... ]
It’s fascinating read. Still, the amount of brain power Matt has dedicated to this makes me feel like it would be better spent elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not safe to say, but rvz likes to keep saying it. When the blocks stop, it has failed. It’s a timechain, a decentralized clock. Tick Tock Next Block.
> It is not safe to say, but rvz likes to keep saying it. Yes it is. Assuming you have read the whole article, it is safe to say that it has failed in its original purpose. I and and many others keep saying it because it is an irrefutable fact after many years of its existence. In the case of the author on Bitcoin and the contents of this article, he has made that totally clear. Hence, can one use it for on-chain pay…
But that isn't the whole story, and it is not really honest to pretend like it is. While it has not become a widely-adopted currency, or even a widely-used payment settlement mechanism, it has become wildly successful as a speculative investment and on that basis it has burrowed deeply into the public consciousness.
So while it's normally the case that when a new innovation comes along and fails to cross the adoption "chasm", we can close the book and say that it has "failed"; the odds it will have another chance are approximated by zero.
But it appears that time remains on the side of bitcoin and cryptocurrency. Look how many headlines there are about crypto at the moment. We're talking about it on Hacker News, and the whitepaper was released in 2008. Crypto will almost assuredly get many more chances to eventually cross the chasm... perhaps someday it will succeed, when volatility has settled down and L2 technology is mature. We are still in the "periodic block halvings drive crazy bubbles" stage of life, but the impact of the halvings are sinking exponentially into irrelevance.
In the end, you might be right; Bitcoin may never be a currency used for mundane payments. In fact, I personally agree that you probably will be right about that; the competing solutions are much, much better than they were in 2008. But it is simply too early to say, and it is definitely not "totally clear".
2022: What do you mean monkey pictures in block chains will lead to a recession? That sounds like nonsense!
Yeah but is crypto causing the crash or just a symptom of it? It doesn’t seem like all the large investment banks and reinsurers are flirting with insolvency due to crypto exposure. They definitely were due to CDO and mortgages. That distinction seems substantive.
The reckoning will be harder in crypto because on top of loose monetary policy, prices have been propped up by money-printing scams like Tether. If crypto wants to prove it has value as a technology and not just a get-rich-quick scheme, it needs to rid itself of the Terras, Tethers and other such actors.
Exactly. Maybe that is why it is the justification for more regulations for stablecoins. Highly likely that is going to happen or introducing their own CBDCs like China or both co-existing once the regulatory framework around stablecoins becomes clearer. Then we will see which ones will comply or not. As for the crypto-maximalists screaming about Bitcoin as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system for on-chain payments…
Is it safe to say that Bitcoin failed?
Yeah but is crypto causing the crash or just a symptom of it? It doesn’t seem like all the large investment banks and reinsurers are flirting with insolvency due to crypto exposure. They definitely were due to CDO and mortgages. That distinction seems substantive.
The Dotcom bubble was inflated by a lot of people investing in something they didn't understand. And the crash did not threaten to destabilize the entire financial system. But it did cause a drag on the broader economy, and had fairly significant local impacts.
Of course that is just when evaluating the crypto bubble. There are multiple other ongoing problems in the economy, and I am having a harder time figuring out what the impacts will be. Stubborn inflation due to supply chain problems, coupled with rapidly rising interest rates feels like we are going to see a lot of companies get caught in very tough situations. There are a lot of companies out there that are supply constrained right now. I imagine they have been hanging on and avoiding layoffs/downsizing the last year or so in the hopes that once the supply chain issues resolve they can quickly ramp back up to 100%. But if debt/financing gets really expensive or demand starts dropping I think we are going to start seeing a lot of layoffs. I still don't think this leads to a 2008 style crash. But I am a bit uneasy about what happens when you take away the cheap debt that has been fueling the economy for the last decade.
2008: What do you mean credit default swaps on synthetic collateralized debt obligations will lead to a recession? That sounds like nonsense! 2022: What do you mean monkey pictures in block chains will lead to a recession? That sounds like nonsense!