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

The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 179 posts

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#101

Post by CPLX »

robbiep wrote: post #75
ulzeraj wrote: post #63

Tether truthing the eminent doom of tether is all well and good but why aren't we talking more about YCombinator promoting startups that burned their customer's money by sending it to anchor protocol UST ponzinomics while lying that those investments were held in USDC and USD? https://twitter.com/fatmanterra/status/1527153694218797058 https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/stablegains Or is it bad to talk about such t…

Definitely looks pretty bad - but on the other hand, an accelerator not making any bets in crypto is not a sensible accelerator. You need to make bets everywhere and hopefully some stick. The other side of that is some don’t stick, and some go proper pear shaped. Make enough bets, it has to happen. I’ve got no idea what their original pitch is, I certainly wouldn’t back a crypto startup that ostensibly aims to do som…

If you’re financially backing and providing direct hands on strategic guidance to an active and blatant scheme to commit securities fraud then you are doing something you should not be doing.

The previous sentence isn’t and shouldn’t be particularly controversial.

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#102

Post by tluyben2 »

ulzeraj wrote: post #63

Tether truthing the eminent doom of tether is all well and good but why aren't we talking more about YCombinator promoting startups that burned their customer's money by sending it to anchor protocol UST ponzinomics while lying that those investments were held in USDC and USD? https://twitter.com/fatmanterra/status/1527153694218797058 https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/stablegains Or is it bad to talk about such t…

> Or is it bad to talk about such things around here?

Don't think if there is good reasoning and no name calling etc.

I would love to hear the explanation how these companies even got into YC from the people who picked them. Is this some type of divide between purely making money at YC (which can be dirty, immoral, bordering on criminal etc) and the tech community of HN who are generally against that sort of thing?

I mean it's not only crypto; it's dark patterns, privacy invasion etc; HN is generally against that, but probably many YC companies would be dead without them.

So is that the reason? YC!=HN?

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#103

Post by CPLX »

xiphias2 wrote: post #5

,,The crypto slump has been brutal’’ I’ve been holding Bitcoin since 2013, and this 50-60% retracement from the all time high was nothing compared to what I (and other people) were living through. I advise people to look at past volatility of Bitcoin before making an investment decision.

Or you could look at the absolutely factual statement that since Bitcoin isn’t a productive asset (in fact it’s the opposite it’s expensive to create) then every single dollar that will ever be taken out of Bitcoin is a dollar that some other person put in.

This is not true of normal investments. For example the dollars you get from selling McDonald’s stock 30 years after purchasing it come from people buying hamburgers.

The fact that there’s no such mechanism with Bitcoin demonstrates that it’s not actually an investment at all.

So when you get your profits out who will have given them to you, and what’s their story?

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#104

Post by pmyteh »

robbiep wrote: post #82
ulzeraj wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is not a bet on crypto but a company that basically went "oh hey sorry too bad the USD displayed on your account is actually UST. K thx bye".

I think I cover that. Company does not equal backer. Bad behaviour by company is not the responsibility of investors, it’s the responsibility of the board, the exec, and ultimately the courts. Investors can shape and influence, investors hopefully provide a filter and feedback, but everyone can get swept up in a good story. Company should be caned. Yc? I’ve already said what I feel.

It's not the legal responsibility of the investors, because society has given them limited liability. It may or may not be their moral responsibility, depending on what they knew, encouraged, or whatever. And the usual payoff for morally-shady but legally-blameless behaviour is reputational damage.

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#105

Post by jsjohnst »

CPLX wrote: post #101
robbiep wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely looks pretty bad - but on the other hand, an accelerator not making any bets in crypto is not a sensible accelerator. You need to make bets everywhere and hopefully some stick. The other side of that is some don’t stick, and some go proper pear shaped. Make enough bets, it has to happen. I’ve got no idea what their original pitch is, I certainly wouldn’t back a crypto startup that ostensibly aims to do som…

If you’re financially backing and providing direct hands on strategic guidance to an active and blatant scheme to commit securities fraud then you are doing something you should not be doing. The previous sentence isn’t and shouldn’t be particularly controversial.

> If you’re financially backing and providing direct hands on strategic guidance to an active and blatant scheme to commit securities fraud then you are doing something you should not be doing.

As you wrote it as a generic hypothetical, no, it’s not really controversial to me. If however you are meaning to say it as a passive aggressive way to accuse YC, yeah, it very much is controversial.

To not be controversial (for me anyway), you’d need to meet some burden of proof with evidence. How much would be enough to meet that burden? I’m not sure at this moment, but as you’ve presented zero that I’ve seen, I think “more than zero” is a fair starting point.

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#106

Post by formerkrogemp »

pmyteh wrote: post #104
robbiep wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I cover that. Company does not equal backer. Bad behaviour by company is not the responsibility of investors, it’s the responsibility of the board, the exec, and ultimately the courts. Investors can shape and influence, investors hopefully provide a filter and feedback, but everyone can get swept up in a good story. Company should be caned. Yc? I’ve already said what I feel.

It's not the legal responsibility of the investors, because society has given them limited liability. It may or may not be their moral responsibility, depending on what they knew, encouraged, or whatever. And the usual payoff for morally-shady but legally-blameless behaviour is reputational damage.

Y-Combinator exists to make Paul Graham and it's investors money. Morality is not money. Y-Combinator doesn't exist to make morality for its investors.

Re: The cryptocurrency sell-off has exposed those swimming naked

#108

Post by scotty79 »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #20
xiphias2 wrote: post #5

,,The crypto slump has been brutal’’ I’ve been holding Bitcoin since 2013, and this 50-60% retracement from the all time high was nothing compared to what I (and other people) were living through. I advise people to look at past volatility of Bitcoin before making an investment decision.

Do you have a strategy of selling on the peaks (possibly even buying on the lows with some of the proceeds) to eventually exit while ahead or are you just holding because you have a strong belief that it can only rise in future and it's not worth following the day to day drama (as many do with stocks)? Either way, you personally benefit from belief in Bitcoin and crypto being generally positive, which has implication…

Rule of thumb might be that it's best to sell some around one year after halving. So the next sell window is around 2025.
Post reply on HN