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

The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

incoherency.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#31

Post by nkrisc »

rvz wrote: post #22
raincole wrote: post #7

Yeah, Bitcoin was in a big bubble in 2017. If you were dumb enough to buy BTC then, today your portfolio would be a devastating +400%.

Remember what HN kept parroting in 2017? "bItCoIn is sCaM". So much of a scam that buying that coveted Tesla Model S in 2017 would sure have held its value much better than Bitcoin did and by now in 2025, Bitcoin should be worthless. Right? Not even close. If Bitcoin was a scam, was it supposed to "crash" from $10k to $100k+ and that Tesla Model S "skyrocketed" from $100k+ to around $40k from its retail price. Sounds…

You should slap whoever taught you that a car was an investment.

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#32

Post by clippyplz »

celticninja wrote: post #26
diggan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This bubble has spurred zero posts as far as I can tell, or zero that gained any traction. ... Did you look? Quick search turns up a bunch of stories that were on the frontpage: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=fal... > But in the past there was nothing new either, but it gained traction because of the numbers of comments. That's the opposite of how things are ranked on HN. Submissions with…

2 posts on that page are less than 6 months old and they are both posts of the same thing.

What? No, there are over 300 results when filtering by "last 6 months".

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#33

Post by diggan »

willis936 wrote: post #23
diggan wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For how long does a "bubble" need to be in "the bubble" for it to not be considered a "bubble" anymore? I'm guessing there is a time limit involved here somewhere?

Economic downturn that motivates holders to liquidate. The house of cards would collapse very quickly if one whale cashed out. Everyone holding is facing a bad version of the prisoner's dilemma.

> The house of cards would collapse very quickly if one whale cashed out

So a thing is a "bubble" for as long as it is possible for it to collapse if whales cash out too quickly? In your mind, every financial system today is a bubble if I understand you correct then?

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#34

Post by cornholio »

rvz wrote: post #22
raincole wrote: post #7

Yeah, Bitcoin was in a big bubble in 2017. If you were dumb enough to buy BTC then, today your portfolio would be a devastating +400%.

Remember what HN kept parroting in 2017? "bItCoIn is sCaM". So much of a scam that buying that coveted Tesla Model S in 2017 would sure have held its value much better than Bitcoin did and by now in 2025, Bitcoin should be worthless. Right? Not even close. If Bitcoin was a scam, was it supposed to "crash" from $10k to $100k+ and that Tesla Model S "skyrocketed" from $100k+ to around $40k from its retail price. Sounds…

Bitcoin is still a criminal ecosystem in 2025. Its only real use case still is enabling illegal transactions and evading financial regulations, and that maintains its speculative value; but that's still a scam not a true investment just like a business used as a front for Mafia appears stable until it inevitably comes crashing down.

But I don't think anyone claimed criminality is not profitable. It can literally make you President.

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#35

Post by AlexandrB »

celticninja wrote: post #15
praveen9920 wrote: post #10

I remember when bitcoin post appeared first on HN. It was trending and lot of people were curious about technical details and people joking about viability as currency. I even started mining for a brief time on work desktop which I had to uninstall immediately of course.

Yeah I remember the white paper being posted in 2009, took another 2 years before I got into bitcoin. The reason I know bitcoin has hit the mainstream and isn't going anywhere is in sort due to HN. This bubble has spurred zero posts as far as I can tell, or zero that gained any traction. In part this is because there is nothing new to discuss. But in the past there was nothing new either, but it gained traction becau…

> Welcome to the new asset class.

Wasn't it supposed to be a currency people would buy stuff with that would eventually replace "fiat"? What happened to that?

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#36

Post by diggan »

dmichulke wrote: post #30
diggan wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For how long does a "bubble" need to be in "the bubble" for it to not be considered a "bubble" anymore? I'm guessing there is a time limit involved here somewhere?

What you're saying is that the claim "it's a bubble" is not falsifiable (people move price and time targets) and therefore a belief and not scientifically grounded, just like a religion. So any discussion with BTC bubble people is futile unless they are willing to put their money where their mouth is.

> What you're saying is that the claim "it's a bubble" is not falsifiable (people move price and time targets) and therefore a belief and not scientifically grounded, just like a religion.

No, I'm merely trying to understand what people's understanding of a "bubble" is. I couldn't care less if others consider Bitcoin a bubble or not, but after hearing "Bitcoin is a bubble" since ~2015 sometime, I feel like I misunderstand what a "bubble" is. The "tulip mania" seems to have been around 2-3 years long, the dotcom bubble around 10 years, so I guess it isn't impossible for a bubble to last 20 or even 30 years.

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#37

Post by wouldbecouldbe »

diggan wrote: post #20
wouldbecouldbe wrote: post #2

BTC is still in a bubble and there is not much news about it :)

For how long does a "bubble" need to be in "the bubble" for it to not be considered a "bubble" anymore? I'm guessing there is a time limit involved here somewhere?

As long as there is no world use justifying it's exorbitant value pumped up by speculation.

The BTC holders trying to rebrand to a value storage instead of a currency is proof of this.

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#38

Post by AlexandrB »

johnisgood wrote: post #29
AlecSchueler wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Remember what HN kept parroting in 2017? "bItCoIn is sCaM". Honestly, no.

I was here, and they still keep saying the same thing. There was a recent submission about Bitcoin. People were still saying how it is a scam and whatnot. Scam or not, many people have gotten rich off of it. I bet the people who kept saying it is a scam wish'd they bought when it was low, they would have been rich today, instead, they double down (because they completely missed their chance due to their opinion), whi…

Many more people have also lost money on it[1]. A Casino is also a great "investment" if you only count the winners.

[1] https://gizmodo.com/bitcoin-crypto-bank-of-international-set...

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#39

Post by [deleted] »

AlexandrB wrote: post #28
rvz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember what HN kept parroting in 2017? "bItCoIn is sCaM". So much of a scam that buying that coveted Tesla Model S in 2017 would sure have held its value much better than Bitcoin did and by now in 2025, Bitcoin should be worthless. Right? Not even close. If Bitcoin was a scam, was it supposed to "crash" from $10k to $100k+ and that Tesla Model S "skyrocketed" from $100k+ to around $40k from its retail price. Sounds…

I'm confused. Who would think buying a car (any car) is an investment that would increase in value? And just because the value of Bitcoin has gone up, doesn't mean it's not a scam. "Market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent." Bitcoin continues to fail at its stated goal of being a currency - it's more like digital gold that, unlike actual gold, would be worthless in a real global crisis. A lot of bi…

[deleted]

Re: The only time HN is this interested in Bitcoin is when there's a bubble (2017)

#40

Post by diggan »

wouldbecouldbe wrote: post #37
diggan wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For how long does a "bubble" need to be in "the bubble" for it to not be considered a "bubble" anymore? I'm guessing there is a time limit involved here somewhere?

As long as there is no world use justifying it's exorbitant value pumped up by speculation. The BTC holders trying to rebrand to a value storage instead of a currency is proof of this.

> As long as there is no world use

Who judges this? Is "bubble" a personal/subjective thing then? Bitcoin is a bubble for you, because there is no use case, but not a bubble for others that can use it for any reason?

Post reply on HN