131–140 of 179 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Maybe it'd be better if our society reprioritized so "these organizations are all amoral actors who exist for no other purpose except to fatten the wallets of their owners" isn't the assumed norm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every time one makes the point that Bitcoin has no real utility, someone says 'Lightning network'. Does anyone know if it's getting any adoption?
not entirely sure, but there appears to be investment from old-school banking, so that could be its on ramp into the classical financial sector. oh yeah, & this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BZoKH-hX_o but yeah, bitcoin has no utility. you'd just have to wait until The Merge inevitably occurs, or use any of the few PoS cryptocurrencies that are generally better & more capable than bitcoin in every capacity, like…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it'd be better if our society reprioritized so "these organizations are all amoral actors who exist for no other purpose except to fatten the wallets of their owners" isn't the assumed norm.
Yes, of course. They should exist for the purpose of advancing things that u/UncleMeat finds important instead. \s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there would be a huge peak, like $200k, I would sell, but generally I don’t believe I can compete with the hedge funds trading Bitcoin, so it’s the second. The only exception was the Bitcoin Cash hard fork, that I strongly opposed as it was being pushed by companies so aggressively even though there was no rough consensus reached, while segregated witness fork contained several critical bug fixes for Bitcoin. I so…
Out of interest, do you set explicit targets like "if it gets to X I will sell"? Just wondering as I'd have thought a "peak" is only evident in retrospect?
Progressive selling on the way up is emotionally very hard to do, as it feels like you're losing money whilst actually being in profit. It's tempting to fully ride the top. Don't.
Next, when the inevitable crash comes, you're uniquely positioned to buy in heavily as you have the dry powder to do so. This too is emotionally hard as everybody is fearful, "blood in the streets". Here too you can progressively buy in rather than try and predict the bottom.
This strategy only works for things that bounce back, which is not true for almost every altcoin or shitcoin.
You can also take permanent profits. Once I made my first significant profit, I took out my initial investment so that effectively I'm in crypto only with profits. I could lose it all and whilst that wouldn't make me happy, it wouldn't truly affect me either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is only if you bought Bitcoin when it was > Just an example last year I had a target of $150k when it was at $50k, and also (like most people) I got a BTC based loan (it made sense for tax purposes as well). That doesn't sound like a good idea in the middle of a bull run and everyone being in profit on Bitcoin when it was at $50K last year or even $69K. I have a different strategy - taking profits and taking adv…
You can't buy the dip during a peak . PP got a loan at 50 which is a bearish trade, halfway to shorting.
The people who bought in at around >$40K and higher just did that and are now bag-holding in drawdown.
> PP got a loan at 50 which is a bearish trade, halfway to shorting.
Well no wonder they received multiple margin calls when the smart traders were taking profits or shorting from >$60K with him ending up on the wrong side of the trade or entering at higher prices and holding into unrealised losses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol, what does "knowing what you're doing mean?"
Just because many people foolishly trade crypto doesn't mean there aren't savvy people quietly making huge amounts of money. I know one of them well, an individual who is up 9 figures over many years while staying market neutral. Don't be fooled into thinking there is no such thing as knowing what you are doing.
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.
Given the number of companies that have gone through the program, I'd be surprised if there wasn't at least one that completely ignored everything the founders didn't want to hear or do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, of course. They should exist for the purpose of advancing things that u/UncleMeat finds important instead. \s
Clearly I shouldn't be the arbiter of world priorities, but I think there is something horribly fatalistic about people defending corporations as amoral entities as some sort of immutable property of the universe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ligthning is an alternative to Bitcoin, not a fix for it. It has a different security model (much much much weaker), it uses entirely different technology, it is essentially centralized. The fact that it uses Bitcoin on the back end is mostly a detail of Lightning.
There is literally not a single thing true in this comment. I would advise you seriously revaluate where you are getting your (mis)information from. Lightning is a way of using bitcoin. A way of cooperatively creating bitcoin transactions with multiple parties, in such a way that you can minimize the number of on-chain transactions required. It is bitcoin. It has the same security model as bitcoin. It uses the same t…
Even worse, if you saw my transaction, then sent me 1BTC worth of goods, then your node becomes offline and I forcefully close the channel with the original balance, I still have my 1BTC and there is no proof anywhere except your node that the transaction ever happened. So no security, unless both nodes are online.
Finally, unless you open direct channels with everyone you want to transact with, you will rely on a 3rd party node that does have such a channel. In practice, this likely means you will use one of a few major nodes that you trust to stay online and not refuse transactions, so the payments are in effect highly centralized.
,,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 hamburg…
People invest and trade in gold. Which effectively means "gold paper", you don't physically own the gold. In fact, there's 4 times more paper gold than actual gold mined. This type of gold isn't productive. It's not going to be used to make jewelry, it doesn't even exist. It's just a number on screen and a shared belief that it has value.
To a degree you can extend that idea to stock. Sure, you can consider Apple stock to be "productive", as they make desirable products. Explain to me then how stocks are so volatile? It's because the value of the stock is largely believe-driven.
It's all just a bunch of numbers on screen. And they're all investments, regardless of personal opinions on actual value.