281–290 of 366 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can easily get (far more than) 15% return over a long period basically risk free by buying the S&P500, so it appears that you are the one who is out of touch with reality. EDIT: How am I wrong?
The long run return on the S&P500 is more like 8%, not 15%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience in interfacing with unsophisticated investors, they aren’t aware of the risk. Should they do more due diligence? Likely. Should there be regulation to protect the unsophisticated? Also likely. Speedrunning securities regulations, as one does.
Agree that if we’re going to have regulations to protect unsophisticated investors from obscured risk, these nonsense “yield farming” ventures should be at the top of the list.
Oh, no. They had feeder funds. Stablegain [1] was feeding money into them: You can now earn up to 15% APY interest on your cash with Stablegains. This is 30x higher than in your traditional bank. You can deposit and withdraw using your preferred methods (ACH, wire transfer, USDC) with the help of our partner Circle. There are no long-term lock-up periods. Earn passive income every day We take care of all technical as…
I'd never heard of stablegains before. So it was basically YC-funded fraud?
Though it's not clear that it's fraud more so than selling imaginary internet money like bitcoins for cash is.
Oh, no. They had feeder funds. Stablegain [1] was feeding money into them: You can now earn up to 15% APY interest on your cash with Stablegains. This is 30x higher than in your traditional bank. You can deposit and withdraw using your preferred methods (ACH, wire transfer, USDC) with the help of our partner Circle. There are no long-term lock-up periods. Earn passive income every day We take care of all technical as…
I'm struggling to understand what the added advantage was of depositing on Stablegains, with 15% APY over Anchor with 19% APY, with both having equal risks. I mean Stablegains sound like grifters who thought they could make easy money (siphoning 3%-4%) by slapping a new UI and marketing the heck out of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There's no fundamental belief in blockchain technology. For skeptics, sure. But there are many investors who hold crypto precisely because they believe in the technology. > Put your money in a broad index fund and don't look at it for 10 years. This is a good safe and low risk bet. It doesn’t invalidate an investment thesis based on crypto currencies and blockchain tech. Crypto is higher risk and higher maintenance…
But the technology doesn't actually work for anything useful (besides tax evasion). Cryptocurrency is a zero-sum ponzi scheme; for someone to win, others have to lose. With stocks, there are on average more winners than losers because new value is being created.
> Cryptocurrency is a zero-sum ponzi scheme
This is repeated a lot on HN but it is easy to refute. A user can purchase $1000 of DAI and send this to another person in the world within 30-60 seconds, without the beneficiary needing to set up a USD bank account or disclose private data to a third party. The beneficiary can decide to hold this asset or exchange it to another asset such as fiat, gold, ETH, food. These are not zero-sum games - they are more comparable to a PayPal exchange than a zero-sum game.
> With stocks, there are on average more winners than losers because new value is being created.
This is questionable. Many stocks are overpriced far beyond their intrinsic value. The expectation that they will continue to go up forever and provide returns depends on people continuing to buy them at higher and higher prices, just like crypto. Some investors do not feel that NFLX and META will continue to go up in value forever, as the price already exceeds their value.
And when you own stock, you cannot do much except hodl and sell. When you own ETH, you can hodl and sell, but also use the token to send transactions to the network and interact with smart contracts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can Bitcoin be a ponzi scheme if it doesn't generate returns for the investors? I have bought and sold Bitcoin on an exchange and the anonymous person on the other end of the trade did not make any promises of returns. By your definition is Uber stock a ponzi scheme? It too does not provide a return and relies on buying pressure to increase it's price so people can reap the rewards of their so called "investment"…
"Ponzi scheme" has become completely divorced from its original meaning. It's supposed to refer to a specific type of scam where you pay "investors" using the money you received from previous investors, but nowadays it's basically just used now to mean "anything crypto-related in which people might lose or have lost their money."
To be fair I probably wouldn't disagree if someone said UST was a actual Ponzi scheme. Holding UST had no real utility compared to the alternatives. The only incentive to hold UST was the 20% APY. Deliberate or not it was a classic ponzi scheme.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are you talking to? WSJ is correct: it was touted as blue-chip. It was not.
This is correct. I had friends in Anchor who had believed in the underlying asset, Terra Luna+UST. Sad day.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/novogratz-says-luna-tattoo-is...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes they can and many do. It’s just not likely if you’re actively trading.
Of course some do, but there are just as many (and a bit more) that under perform. The average performance relative to the index matters.
Uh oh. Heavy withdrawals at USDT.[1] Half a billion dollars pulled out today, all at once. Almost four billion in the last week. The market cap for USDT has dropped from US$84 billion to US$63 billion in the last month and a half. Looks like we're going to find out soon what assets really back Tether. [1] https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/tether/