Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the distance between love and glove is only 1.. who cares ?
Quoted post unavailable.
I think some of us just thought it was amusing.
$3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
381–390 of 540 posts
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anchor protocol always retained the full amount of each UST deposit, plus additional rewards (whose funding was external to Anchor), so clearly Anchor is not a Ponzi, as I thought you were implying originally. Would you assert that any undercollateralized currency is a Ponzi? (Seems like stretching the definition to me.) Or that any system with unsustainable rewards is a Ponzi, even if there was no expectation that t…
The details of the protocol are just obfuscation. The 10,000 ft view is that people converted USD to tokens so they could earn 20% interest. As the dust settles, we can see the outcome looks exactly like a Ponzi: (1) The folks running the scheme walked away with a couple billion dollars (2) Those who cashed out early got back their original investment plus interest (3) Everyone else lost all/most of their investment…
Companies which IPO (or cryptocurrencies which ICO) and later fail have those same outcomes. Surely they're not all Ponzis?
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin also has the backing of a government - El Salvador. I would rather argue though that even government backed currencies are fully dependant on trust, not government usage of it. Just check out any government currency hyperinflation event.
El Salvador is a failed state about to default on its national debt. It's not a real "government" in the way that most of us would define the term.
What criteria of the definition doesn't El Salvador fulfill?
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
LUNA minted trillions of brand new tokens within the span of a day or so rendering the token worthless. This is due to the way LUNA was tied to the algorithmic stablecoin UST. It was a true ponzi. BTC's max supply is capped and the release schedule of new coins is fixed and predictable. There is no possible way that trillions of new bitcoins could suddenly be created.
No assets though-- the only thing backing bitcoin are "greater fools"
That actually sounds pretty sound then. I wouldn't have said/thought that a decade ago but of late I've begun to think that's a pretty good bet.
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the distance between love and glove is only 1.. who cares ?
Quoted post unavailable.
Who can turn a bit into a bite?
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
The details of the protocol are just obfuscation. The 10,000 ft view is that people converted USD to tokens so they could earn 20% interest. As the dust settles, we can see the outcome looks exactly like a Ponzi: (1) The folks running the scheme walked away with a couple billion dollars (2) Those who cashed out early got back their original investment plus interest (3) Everyone else lost all/most of their investment…
Companies which IPO (or cryptocurrencies which ICO) and later fail have those same outcomes. Surely they're not all Ponzis?
Any company whose business plan for repaying early investors consists of bilking later investors, while producing nothing isn't going to get to IPO.
But you are right, this sort of thing is incredibly common in the ICO world.
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
Luna crashed because people lost trust in it. The only reason people have trust in BTC is because other people have trust in it. If that ever changed, there is no actual use for a BTC, and they are thus intrinsically worthless. Fiat currency has the backing of a government. The government demands certain payments of this currency in order to own land, and also for some extra rights like mineral extraction, fishing li…
Bitcoin also has the backing of a government - El Salvador. I would rather argue though that even government backed currencies are fully dependant on trust, not government usage of it. Just check out any government currency hyperinflation event.
> Bitcoin also has the backing of a government - El Salvador.
A government backed currency means the government can issue that currency (for better or worse).
Bitcoin is legal tender in El Salvador, as is the US Dollar[1]. The US dollar is also legal tender in Zimbabwe and other countries.
We don't say the US dollar is backed by El Salvador or Zimbabwe. Instead it is backed by the "full faith and credit of the United States".
[1] https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/040915/countries...
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#388Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Only banks should have that privilege? Yes, in exchange for the privilege of money creation you need tight regulations and public disclosures. Banking left unregulated turns into this mess time and time again. You'd think people would be more disciplined about betting private money creators. But they aren't. They never are. Particularly not when their neighbor is showing orders of magnitudes of paper gains. This wa…
> Banking left unregulated turns into this mess time and time again. And yet, regulated banking also turns into a mess time and time again.
Into a mess for who? Depositors?
Could you summarize how much money depositors across the entire United States lost to bank busts over the past, say 40 years?
And how does it stand up, compared to the crypto-of-the-month scams, losses, and exchange busts?
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#389"Sold" It's hard to show that they really sold these coins. Certainly, the LFG transferred the coins to some different exchanges. But did they truly sell them? If I was running a dodgy ponzi scheme and saw it collapsing catastrophically, I don't think I'd be throwing good money after bad trying to futilely patch it up. Much better to stash the remaining assets away somewhere and personally cash out later on. Also, “I…
> 'this is good for bitcoin' A total ponzi scam coin crashed. This IS good for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is not Luna nor is it one of the thousands of other garbage scam coins. The faster those coins are proven scams the better. Too many people falsely equate "Bitcoin === Crypto".. or "a fan of bitcoin is a fan of all crypto". So I'd bounce this back to you: How is Luna's Ponzi crash NOT good for bitcoin?
Don't look too far into what's backing Tether than, unless that burning is also 'good for Bitcoin.'
Lucky, that one has enough vested interest from those making money they'll do an awful lot to stop it following LUNA (inc if you look at the recent depeg)
Re: $3B in Bitcoin was sold in a last-ditch attempt to save UST from collapse
#390Earlier quoted context omitted.
Luna crashed because people lost trust in it. The only reason people have trust in BTC is because other people have trust in it. If that ever changed, there is no actual use for a BTC, and they are thus intrinsically worthless. Fiat currency has the backing of a government. The government demands certain payments of this currency in order to own land, and also for some extra rights like mineral extraction, fishing li…
A better argument might be fiat currency is stable because governments hold a monopoly on violence. But governments can be poorly run so I suppose “stable” is not the right word.
> But governments can be poorly run so I suppose “stable” is not the right word.
no, but the currency belonging to a particular gov't is as stable as the gov't itself, so your statement is still true; vis a vis the Zimbabwe currency vs the US dollar.