71–80 of 332 posts
Crypto crashes every couple years and of course it has grown immensely since the last crash so the scale and scope of these kinds of “analyses” grow with it. I’d imagine in 5 years in the next big crash it will be the top news around the global for many weeks.
> On Monday, the Financial Times published an interview with Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the FTX crypto-trading exchange, in which he said bitcoin doesn’t have a future as a means of payment because it is too complicated and environmentally costly. https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1526098754163687424
I think he's a little biased because he's heavily involved with Solana
Disclosure: All of my crypto is in Solana :D
Crypto cannot create wealth, only move it around. If too many people become crypto-rich and try to spend it on real-world assets, the assets will just inflate in price. What can happen is that crypto could replace other forms of money. Governments will likely fight this tooth and nail however, because crypto is currently an anti-government technology.
Money is a creation of government, and frankly, the dollar ain’t so bad. If my bank goes under I’m protected by the FDIC. If Coinbase goes under they have the right to use my money to pay their creditors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
BTC is down 53% from ATH. NFLX is down almost 75%. PTON is down over 91%. You'd actually be better off investing in BTC than in many tech darlings. I don't own any crypto, but I don't think it's fair to single out crypto in the middle of a broad tech downturn.
Compare against SPY.
I wonder how much of it's high volume is just that it has the letters "s" and "p" in it?
Crypto cannot create wealth, only move it around. If too many people become crypto-rich and try to spend it on real-world assets, the assets will just inflate in price. What can happen is that crypto could replace other forms of money. Governments will likely fight this tooth and nail however, because crypto is currently an anti-government technology.
> Governments will likely fight this tooth and nail however, because crypto is currently an anti-government technology. Democratic governments represent the will of the people, and I don't think a technology can be pro-government or anti-government, it ultimately depends on what the people what. I think you are correct though for autocratic governments. Would you for example say that guns are clearly anti-government…
How are people still this naive and indoctrinated. Me, earlier:
> You vote what you're told to vote by the media that the state and capital dominate entirely (Think about it: how would enough people even hear about an alternative idea or candidate that they don't deem in their interest?) If you're American you get to choose between two millionaires (or sometimes billionaires) with virtually identical economic politics chosen in advanced for you who can safely ignore you once they get elected. "Democracy."
Crypto cannot create wealth, only move it around. If too many people become crypto-rich and try to spend it on real-world assets, the assets will just inflate in price. What can happen is that crypto could replace other forms of money. Governments will likely fight this tooth and nail however, because crypto is currently an anti-government technology.
No, I disagree. That’s like saying an isp can’t create information, only move it around. Metadata is value, such as on-chain data being an expression of trade volumes etc, and this itself is a second order value, beyond the utility of trustless censorship resistant payments, that in itself is worth percents of the total value transacted. Yes, it is a protocol, but TCP/IP made many fortunes also. Even though it just m…
If it goes up in value again, 2x or 10x its current value, will people who said it was a grift admit it was more than that?
I would bet money (fiat or digital) that, in either case, most people on either side will just say "I haven't been proven right yet", because it's just camps yelling at each other at this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a great point: even above speculation, a core part of cryptocurrency's "stickiness" is that it's effectively unregulated gambling with extremely large upsides. I think that points to the best recourse we have, after the next crash: it needs to be regulated into the dirt.
It seems rash to wish for regulation to be weaponized to the effect of banning something, rather the actual meaning of regulation to define and enforce orderly, fair, predictable functioning of something.
Crypto cannot create wealth, only move it around. If too many people become crypto-rich and try to spend it on real-world assets, the assets will just inflate in price. What can happen is that crypto could replace other forms of money. Governments will likely fight this tooth and nail however, because crypto is currently an anti-government technology.
Money is a creation of government, and frankly, the dollar ain’t so bad. If my bank goes under I’m protected by the FDIC. If Coinbase goes under they have the right to use my money to pay their creditors.
I can't help feeling that by the time that becomes relevant, those cryptocurrencies are quite likely to be worth very little anyway, as coinbase going under is (IMHO) quite likely to be correlated with a general cryptocurrency market crash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, exactly. I've been working in crypto for 4 years and counting, still haven't purchased a single token as an investment. I don't like downside risk, I like to build product. We've weathered one bear market, we'll weather another. Thankfully there's cool stuff in the ecosystem that isn't a scam, but it's not newsworthy, so it doesn't go viral.
Can you give some examples of cool stuff that isn't a scam? I'm genuinely curious.
But given how online people are in general (and they're only likely to become more online in the future), it's natural they'll want digitally-native ways to organize themselves, represent ownership, qualify membership, etc.
The shift in concept required here is from viewing a token as "an investment" to viewing it as a form of legible social proof within its community context, which becomes more meaningful as communities grow beyond the "tipping point" where interpersonal proof (think webs-of-trust) is sufficient for coordination. NFTs (yes, they're still around!) are already serving this function for certain experimental communities (and even in less experimental ones, see POAPs).
In general, everything above is still in the experimental, live or die phase. We don't quite know where it's going. But it's pretty damn cool to watch if you're deeply invested in the internet as a medium (and as someone who "grew up online", I absolutely am).