Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M • Hacker News Board

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#121

Post by shelled » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:15 AM UTC

This reminded me of WorldCoin and it was sad to see it's still trading 0.01 above its all time low. I had expected it to go much much down further.

My introduction to it was at a local mall here. A person just approached and me and I politely said "I don't want it" assuming it was the credit cards or donations and he chuckled and said "sir, it's not credit cards" but I kept moving and then he pointed me to that creepy looking shiny globe/round thing. The moment I saw "Sam Altman" mentioned on a print-out kept there, I couldn't run faster out of there. I later read about it and found out this time around the creepy bugger was out scanning everyone's iris.

I think there are many types of scams after all. Good scam, bad scam, legit scam, illegitimate scam et cetera.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#122

Post by TeaBrain » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:17 AM UTC

EGreg wrote: post #77

TeaBrain wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point 2 is the basis for a pyramid scheme.

Pyramid schemes are illegal, but Multi-Level-Marketing schemes are legal. And you don't need multiple levels. You can have one level. That's called affiliate marketing. Loyalty points are a thing. You can earn them as an affiliate, for instance. It doesn't have to be a pyramid. But if you are going that route, almost all startups are "pyramid schemes" that end up with an IPO where the public continues to demand rents…

>Pyramid schemes are illegal, but Multi-Level-Marketing schemes are legal.

In this case, this wouldn't even fit the mold for a multilevel marketing scheme, or even affiliate marketing. There are real cash flows detached from a buy-in both of those schemes.

>people earn utility tokens they can spend once into the economy, than shares where they have the right to demand rent extraction

Again, there's cash flows underlying shares of a company. There's not in the case of a digital asset that people refer to as a coin or token.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#123

Post by nextworddev » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:25 AM UTC

dysoco wrote: post #69

Just to clarify, here are some important differences compared to the Trump case: 1. Milei did not sell this as a memecoin at all, unlike Trump, he sold it as a "financial instrument to help finance small Argentinan enterprises". 2. Trump tweeted about $TRUMP BEFORE stepping into office, Milei is already the president of Argentina. This constitutes an obvious ethical violation, and possibly a legal one as well. 3. 80%…

was the coin explicitly sold as a memecoin?

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#124

Post by manquer » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:26 AM UTC

droptablemain wrote: post #34

The Solana trenches are effectively a giant crime-riddled casino. Everyone who plays understands this -- you can make money but you're essentially gambling. I'm not saying this is OK, but it's the current state of things. When this $Libra token launched, everything else dumped as capital flowed into it, and then effectively got siphoned off by insiders. So even people that didn't chase "Argentina's coin" got screwed.…

> you can make money but you're essentially gambling.

It is much worse than that, legitimate gambling is fine.

In meme coins everyone knows they are scamming and and it is a pump and dump but just think that there would be some dumb "bag holder".

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#125

Post by EGreg » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:28 AM UTC

TeaBrain wrote: post #122

EGreg wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pyramid schemes are illegal, but Multi-Level-Marketing schemes are legal. And you don't need multiple levels. You can have one level. That's called affiliate marketing. Loyalty points are a thing. You can earn them as an affiliate, for instance. It doesn't have to be a pyramid. But if you are going that route, almost all startups are "pyramid schemes" that end up with an IPO where the public continues to demand rents…

>Pyramid schemes are illegal, but Multi-Level-Marketing schemes are legal. In this case, this wouldn't even fit the mold for a multilevel marketing scheme, or even affiliate marketing. There are real cash flows detached from a buy-in both of those schemes. >people earn utility tokens they can spend once into the economy, than shares where they have the right to demand rent extraction Again, there's cash flows underly…

Not sure I understand what you're trying to say. There are "real cash flows" in every case, just what you consider as the unit of account is different.

As far as shares, no. It's completely different. Shares are equity securities, that entitle people to dividends or they want the shares to go up in price. Regardless, it sets up a never-ending demand for enshittification and rent extraction that you see across Big Tech. Utility tokens are fundamentally different and don't have those perverse incentives, and remove the shareholder class. It's like comparing shares in Disney Corp, to Disney Dollars.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#126

Post by yalogin » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:29 AM UTC

Crypto finally found a great use case then -- It's clearly scam artists and people exploiting their popularity to screw over regular people. There has been an implosion of those recently.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#127

Post by yalogin » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:29 AM UTC

nextworddev wrote: post #123

dysoco wrote: post #69

Just to clarify, here are some important differences compared to the Trump case: 1. Milei did not sell this as a memecoin at all, unlike Trump, he sold it as a "financial instrument to help finance small Argentinan enterprises". 2. Trump tweeted about $TRUMP BEFORE stepping into office, Milei is already the president of Argentina. This constitutes an obvious ethical violation, and possibly a legal one as well. 3. 80%…

was the coin explicitly sold as a memecoin?

Is it not?

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#128

Post by valcron1000 » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:31 AM UTC

dysoco wrote: post #69

Just to clarify, here are some important differences compared to the Trump case: 1. Milei did not sell this as a memecoin at all, unlike Trump, he sold it as a "financial instrument to help finance small Argentinan enterprises". 2. Trump tweeted about $TRUMP BEFORE stepping into office, Milei is already the president of Argentina. This constitutes an obvious ethical violation, and possibly a legal one as well. 3. 80%…

[flagged]

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#129

Post by int_19h » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:32 AM UTC

7speter wrote: post #93

protocolture wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard every reasoning for regular currency to have more value over cryptos since 16/17 when I started paying attention. Gold Standard, Government Protection, Debt, Government credit instruments. But everything I read about currency tells me that its largely always just agreed upon make believe. The case with the Real absolutely confirmed that for me.

Neither the rule of law nor following through on contracts and other obligations are imaginary

And both equally apply to cryptocurrencies.

Re: Javier Milei backtracks on $4.4B memecoin after 'insiders' pocket $87M

#130

Post by EGreg » Mon, Feb 17, 2025, 4:33 AM UTC

llamaimperative wrote: post #79

EGreg wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is extremely vague and seems to be so on purpose in order to just have some nebulous "attack". Do you really think Web2 platforms aren't the epitome of rentseeking, by taking advantage of their role as middlemen?

Obviously existing middlemen are rent seekers. The question is why anyone should eat the cost of switching to a new, less proven rent seeker. To the hopeful new rent seeker, the pitch is obvious. To everyone else, the provided rationales tend to sound like a whole lot of bullshit.

Why should people use automation at all?

This is like asking why people should switch from telephone switchboard operators, to automatic switchboards. Or why should anyone switch from livery cab services to Uber.

Technology may be "less proven" initially, but it's far more reliable in the end. It also removes a whole class of inefficiencies and conflicts that won't be possible with smart contracts, the same way that you could remove them if you switched from anything custom to anything standardized.

If you just stopped repeating the same tropes "web3 bad" for the sake of saying them, and engage with the substance, you'll see that this is a case of standardization, automation and programming what was previously ad-hoc and requires costly arbitration after the fact.