Live data from Hacker News

Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

twitter.com

131–140 of 161 posts

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#131
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that true of anything that doesn't include the fed? I mean unless you can print money, you can't change the amount of fiat in any subset of the economy. You can still add value though which would be evident by more people wanting a piece of whatever pie there is, driving more fiat into the subset and/or creating paper gains which is a sort of money in itself, but this is true for crypto as well. For example, I…

> (investments, debt, advertiser dollars, ...) I think the problem is that the first pipe is just investment/debt. You need a second pipe of money coming in -- ad revenue, sales, fees for services provided -- or else, as said, the money going back to investors can't exceed the money coming in from investment. As long as that second money pipe remains aspirational/marginal, there's just not much potential.

So stuff like precious metals, commodities (energy, corn, pork, ...), stocks that don't pay dividends, etc are then also equally worthless?

I don't think holding a barrel of oil or a bar of gold, or a share of Berkshire Hathaway will generate any income for me. I'd need to sell it to someone else for me to get my money back.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, you are confusing market cap with "value" or some other concept. Market cap is price of the last sale multiplied by stock. So every asset has it by definition. Second, how do you back up that statement of not being able to sell it? How do you know you couldn't sell those Bitcoins back to the market? Would you think the same about buying up all gold?

This is what I was thinking. Anything that another person wants has value. Gold, water, btc. People make this big distinction for things like oil because it's used for something but I don't see how's thats relevant.

It is relevant because if something has a use, there is a basis for the value. If something is only valuable because people believe it to be valuable, then you must maintain that belief in order to maintain that value. For instance a used stamp that is rare is valuable to collectors even though it has no use, but aside from a few collectors there is no market for that stamp. The problem with a huge market filled by people buying due to speculation is that as soon as something spooks the market it tanks and the value doesn't hold, because people don't actually want the thing they are holding, they just want to be able to sell it to someone else. This is why the crypto scene is very cultish -- it is all built on maintaining the belief, and the utility is secondary.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#133
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of "government digital currencies" are you referring to?

Google term: central bank digital currency For example, Sweden: https://www.riksbank.se/sv/betalningar--kontanter/e-krona/

Isn't this the same fiat just instead of being paper-printed, e-printed? Another distribution medium for essentially the same thing?

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is it with people defending crypto with terrible metaphors? Why do you feel the need for this type of attack?

It is frustrating that many times when someone asks a question about crypto instead of an answer there is a comparison to something else that is irrelevant using a metaphor based on a misconception.

I understand, and hope we can keep the conversation sober going forward.

To answer your questions without any use of metaphors:

I do not know whether Crypto is a good or a bad idea. I am merely trying not to be presumptive about it.

The horse metaphor is an attempt to lead some attention to the fact that we several times in the history have seen long adaptation time for certain technologies we benefit from on large scale.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#135
post #120
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you would make the same circles but with different fiat currency on one side and difference fiat currency on the other side you would figure out that exchanging different fiat currency isn't generating any value therefore the Forex markets should not exists. And extending on that knowledge any currency from a country that produced more debts each year should be worthless. Reality check: Nope, both not true in the…

Not sure I agree with this. If you're trading fiat currencies as investment rather than out of travel necessity, you're essentially saying that you think that the governance of one country is over or undervalued in relation to another and you can profit from identifying that discrepancy. It doesn't matter if the country is creating more debt as long as you have faith in the governance of the country and their reasoni…

I think you misunderstand my post, I made a case AGAINST the logic of the parent story. I'm fully aware that forex trading is essential for the economy and that people make huge profits doing it.

BTW if you trade fiat you are not investing you are speculating same with trading crypt. But people keep comparing it to an investment.

See my other post about the distinction here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33654983

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#136
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you would make the same circles but with different fiat currency on one side and difference fiat currency on the other side you would figure out that exchanging different fiat currency isn't generating any value therefore the Forex markets should not exists. And extending on that knowledge any currency from a country that produced more debts each year should be worthless. Reality check: Nope, both not true in the…

But forex enables international trade. Dollars to euros or vice versa allows you to buy real products from America or Europe. What can you buy with crypto? Drugs, ok... but that market is not big enough to justify its valuation. Financial products, fine, but what are the financial products? The underlying asset of the vast majority of these financial products is just other crypto stuff! Well, you can speculate on fia…

So what can you do with Mexican Peso if you are in Europe? Can you buy Food? Drugs? Probably not. Does it matter if you bought it solely to speculate on its value? Clearly it does not. If you bought Mexican Peso yesterday and sell it today for a profit then that's it. Why would you care about what it is good for? The whole point of speculating with assets is to make profit from price movements.

Now replace Mexican Peso with baseball cards then with crypto. There is no difference. Everyone knows baseball cards are useless and wont let you buy food not even drugs. But if you get an opportunity to make money trading them why would you not? Trading crypto or even NFTs is just way way simpler than trading baseball cards so more people have access to it.

If all the people who constantly say how useless everything is would actually put their money where their mouth is and would trade and bet on lower prices then they would make huge money. And in the long run it would stabilize the market so we dont get these absurd bubbles and JPEGs temporary worth millions. But its all talk no action. The market requires the "everything is worthless" people to counter the "everything is gold" people. Yet these people just stay on the side line and every 4 year when it crashes they come together and slap each-other on the back for being too clever to partake.

Personally I dont mind it, these huge waves are where money can be made. The recent crashes have been very profitable for me.

>But forex enables international trade.

So does crypt. And cheap international remittance. Everything just runs better if liquidity is high in any asset.

The whole FTX crash and all that dint change anything its just a large fraudulent entity which's fallout will now affect the whole market. The exchange actually runs on the traditional financial system everything they did that was fraudulent wasn't crypt fraud it was just normal fraud. If anything this once again shows that you should not give your money to anyone else and that the government will not protect people form criminals. Needless to say that traditional market invested in FTX so they will be affected too.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#137
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (investments, debt, advertiser dollars, ...) I think the problem is that the first pipe is just investment/debt. You need a second pipe of money coming in -- ad revenue, sales, fees for services provided -- or else, as said, the money going back to investors can't exceed the money coming in from investment. As long as that second money pipe remains aspirational/marginal, there's just not much potential.

So stuff like precious metals, commodities (energy, corn, pork, ...), stocks that don't pay dividends, etc are then also equally worthless? I don't think holding a barrel of oil or a bar of gold, or a share of Berkshire Hathaway will generate any income for me. I'd need to sell it to someone else for me to get my money back.

You're presuming that every purchase of a commodity -- even gold -- is an investment in it.

People also purchase commodities to consume them. The commodity exits the world o' commodities and the money stays, to be returned to investors.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#138
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But forex enables international trade. Dollars to euros or vice versa allows you to buy real products from America or Europe. What can you buy with crypto? Drugs, ok... but that market is not big enough to justify its valuation. Financial products, fine, but what are the financial products? The underlying asset of the vast majority of these financial products is just other crypto stuff! Well, you can speculate on fia…

So what can you do with Mexican Peso if you are in Europe? Can you buy Food? Drugs? Probably not. Does it matter if you bought it solely to speculate on its value? Clearly it does not. If you bought Mexican Peso yesterday and sell it today for a profit then that's it. Why would you care about what it is good for? The whole point of speculating with assets is to make profit from price movements. Now replace Mexican Pe…

You can certainly purchase from a Mexican exporter if you're in Europe with pesos.

> If you bought Mexican Peso yesterday and sell it today for a profit then that's it. Why would you care about what it is good for? The whole point of speculating with assets is to make profit from price movements.

I mean, funnily enough, I've heard this sort of reasoning:

> And now all of a sudden everyone's like, wow, people just decide to put $200 million in the box. This is a pretty cool box, right? Like this is a valuable box as demonstrated by all the money that people have apparently decided should be in the box. And who are we to say that they're wrong about that? Like, you know, this is, I mean boxes can be great. Look, I love boxes as much as the next guy. And so what happens now? All of a sudden people are kind of recalibrating like, well, $20 million, that's it? Like that market cap for this box? And it's been like 48 hours and it already is $200 million, including from like sophisticated players in it. They're like, come on, that's too low. And they look at these ratios, TVL, total value locked in the box, you know, as a ratio to market cap of the box’s token.

But, on the other hand, well,

> If all the people who constantly say how useless everything is would actually put their money where their mouth is and would trade and bet on lower prices then they would make huge money.

I have heard this as well:

> So you've got this boxes and it’s kind of dumb, but like what's the end game, right? This box is worth zero obviously. And like that, you know, you can't like keep this smart cap or something. But on the other hand, if everyone kind of now thinks that this box token is worth about a billion dollar market cap, that's what people are pricing it at and sort of has that market cap. Everyone's gonna mark to market. In fact, you can even finance this, right? You put X token in a borrow lending protocol and borrow dollars with it. If you think it's worth like less than two thirds of that, you could even just like put some in there, take the dollars out. Never, you know, give the dollars back. You just get liquidated eventually. And it is sort of like real monetizable stuff in some senses. And you know, at some point if the world never decides that we are wrong about this in like a coordinated way, right? Like you're kind of the guy calling and saying, no, this thing's actually worthless, but in what sense are you right?

Shorting is tricky for many reasons. There's the counterparty risk of how you're going to actually collect (say you borrow against FTT to get Tether which you use as collateral for your FTT loan; who's to say Tether is worth anything?). The space is rife with market manipulation, so you could take a short position and just get wiped out. And it could just keep going up until it goes back down.

I'd love to be bullish on crypto. I still have some. But like I said, it simply can't be healthy that pretty much every crypto financial product seems to just be based around crypto. It's like a stock exchange where every listed company just trades stock of other companies on the exchange.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#139
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5 cent per TX is actually expensive compared to some crypt solutions. This is projected. Actual cost to consumers will depend on banks and how they choose to recover the cost. As an example, credit card transactions are much, much higher but a lot of consumers consider them *free* because they aren't charged directly. Yes, some crypto transactions may be cheaper --- for crypto swaps only. But crypto isn't a functioni…

Its irrelevant how much it will cost in the end. Moving fiat inside the same currency space is rather trivial, its just balances on a server in the end. Moving currencies across borders between different jurisdictions and currencies that is actually where the problems start and thus this is not cheap and not fast. People already use crypto as a bridge currency today to transfer "functioning currency" aka fiat. If you…

People do this since many years now circumventing banks and payment providers who would take a huge fee.

Take an individual case and add up all the end to end fees associated with doing this. Most likely, they are still huge.

A lot of these people aren't really saving much money compared to traditional banking. They're doing this for convenience because they can't easily get a bank account or don't want one because they operate outside the system.

Re: Warren Buffet and Charlie Munger on crypto in 2018

#140
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the difference is that there are many tech stocks that aren’t overhyped and are delivering things of value to the market, paying dividends, and rightly appreciating (eg, apple, Microsoft, Amazon, etc). I don’t think there’s any examples of crypto that have had virtuous payouts in the past 10 years. Everything is based on some future payout and luring in greater fools. So I don’t think the comparison is valid…

General agreement, with minor clarification: AMZN has never paid a dividend, at least to my knowledge; they certainly don’t do it regularly.

Yes, good point. Amazon does not pay a dividend. But I think they are a successful tech company that delivers value and an understandable return on their stock.
Post reply on HN