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

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

coindesk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 383 posts

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

#131

Post by int_19h »

aoeusnth1 wrote: post #90
cwalv wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin really is different. It's a commodity rather than a security, and proof of work consensus is essential for its use case.

Dollars ultimately have value because the United States government collects taxes in dollars. Who demands Bitcoin, except speculators? It's value is entirely propped up by it's cultural expectation - meme value - with no tether to a real source of demand for BTC.

Anyone who needs to conduct transactions without having their name attached to it, and cannot meet personally to use cash. Online black market purchases, say.

You're not wrong that like 99.9% of BTC value is from speculation, but it does have its valid use cases.

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

#132

Post by EGreg »

mvdtnz wrote: post #92
EGreg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how are they going to earn this money for actions that help the community? It's much better when you can issue your own money supply

Same way people have earned money for millennia I suppose. If it has value it will be paid for.

Yes, exactly. It will be paid for in a coin that was issued by the community or the celebrity themselves.

The celebrity gets to have their own web server, their own coin, etc. making them independent of Big Tech and Big Banks. They can't get deplatformed. Their community can organize however they deem fit. The smart contracts allow everyone to trust the system.

Just saying someone will "pay you" like they did for millennia doesn't really discuss "in what medium". We have long moved past commodity money, gold blocks, then gold coins, then paper banknotes, to electronic money inside regulated banks, this is just the latest form that money can take.

Opposing it for the sake of opposing it, is like opposing the Web and HTTP and open protocols, because you think AOL and MSN walled gardens ought to be good enough for anybody, and no one really needs any custom servers or self-sovereign websites.

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

#133

Post by wvlia5 »

valcron1000 wrote: post #128
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]

We found the kuka

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

#134

Post by tombert »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #107
tombert wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes me wonder if I should pull my savings out of index funds and just keep cash in a savings account in the short term. Normally I'd buy treasury bills, but honestly considering that Elon has been fucking around with the treasury's code with no oversight, and considering that Trump's big strategy for eliminating national debt has been to "declare bankruptcy" (whatever that would even means in regards to an entir…

Whatever you do, do not buy bonds right now. As they sell off and rates rise, the value of your bonds on the secondary market will get trashed. You'll also have an opportunity to buy bonds with massive yields if the market crashes due to a debt crisis. I mean imagine getting paid 20% per year, tax advantaged, for the next 30 years. Honestly, the rule with indexes is buy and hold. Although I'm confident we have a cras…

I wasn't planning on buying long-term bonds regardless; historically I have bought short-term treasury bills, usually 4 to 8 weeks, depending on the coupon rate, so I'm not too worried about the value on the secondary market. I'm much more concerned with the fed defaulting on paying me back.

I more or less came to the same conclusion that you listed; I don't really want to create a big taxable event, so I think right now I'm going to keep the stock I have, and in the shorter term keep future income in a savings account for awhile and suss out if there's going to be a crash or not.

Obviously you can't really "time" the market but it's a pretty low-risk experiment on my end.

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

#135

Post by Panzer04 »

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%…

Whatever the stupidity around this memecoin, it's hard to argue he isn't doing something to help the argentinian economy.

It turns out it doesn't take much to appear to be an economic genius - just stop spending money the government doesn't have and get rid of onerous market regulations (eg. rent controls).

I'm in support of social spending to support those in need, but it's clear Argentina was moving ever-further away from being able to sustain that kind of discretionary spending as a country. They need to get their house in order first.

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

#136

Post by cwalv »

BobbyJo wrote: post #120
cwalv wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You are equating legitimacy with liquidity, and the that isn't necessarily true. How so? Liquidity is a measurement of how easy it is to trade, and if it's easy to trade there are many people/entities that believe it's "legitimate" currency, or they wouldn't trade for it

Parent said "store of value" not "currency". Liquidity is probably sufficient for a currency (depending on the features of the liquidity), but it is not sufficient for a store of value.

Fair enough; store of value additionally requires restricted supply so that the value isn't debased. But in the context of this thread, that just strengthens the argument that 'Bitcoin is different'.

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

#137

Post by brookst »

int_19h wrote: post #129
7speter wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

And both equally apply to cryptocurrencies.

And now I have to clean coffee out of my keyboard. Thanks.

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

#138

Post by TZubiri »

Aurornis wrote: post #106

> the company informed him about the Libra blockchain project and its aims to finance private ventures in the country. I can’t believe people are still falling for these claims. Every single time someone launches a coin with claims that purchasing it will help fund some special cause, there is no basis to the claim. If you want to fund or finance a cause, give your money to that cause. If you buy a meme coin, you’re…

But of course the motivator wasn't actually to "finance private ventures", it was to rent seek and to speculate about making profit by being first to be in on the thing.

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

#139

Post by TZubiri »

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.…

I don't get the crime part for the most part.

If you know the rules of the game and you willingly participate, then how is it different from any casino?

I don't buy into any of the people that claim they were scammed, they knew the rules and they tried to make money out of nothing. Other than perhaps trading unregulated securities, I don't see the actual fraud.

To be clear it is distinct from pretending to be a security for an actual productive company, that is actual fraud, but usually the coins are very transparent about having no underlying value.

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

#140

Post by TZubiri »

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%…

Great take regarding 1 and 2.

Regarding 3 it seems clear to me that he was not an insider, but he was scammed into spending his political capital and reputation.

As a whole, it's classic cargo cult situation,imitating what a more powerful country is doing without understanding the nuances.

Post reply on HN