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

Web3? I have my DAOts

networked.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 636 posts

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#361

Post by diveanon »

EugeneG wrote: post #286
bsnsmsksjs wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll bite. A winery could sell ownership of wine stored or wine yet to be made. The purchaser, if sold via an NFT, could resell that ownership with no interaction with the winery until claiming the wine at a later date. This means both parties no longer need any relationship between the initial sale and claiming the eventual goods. The winery will simply be able to wait for someone to return with proof of ownership a…

The question is can you really make it simultaneously cheap to trade and decentralized and always on. Or is the overhead of all that just make blockchain tech very awkward and suboptimal (especially since ultimately there's a centralized winery that honors the "claim" with actual wine - so no real need for decentralization). Instead why not just have a little centralized company that lets companies create ledgers of…

Transactions on most L2 chains these days are less than a penny.

There are dozens of popular mobile wallets that make viewing, sending, receiving coins / nfts trivial.

The problem that it solves is that there is no need for you imaginary ledger company to exist at all in a blockchain model, the winery cuts out a rent seeking service and the user gets a more secure and portable product.

Automation isn't just going to hit manual labor, blockchain and web3 will allow for the emergence of fully autonomous "companies" that operate via smart contracts.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#362

Post by boc »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #355
boc wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you've set me up perfectly for the real point: stocks generate dividends. Dividends mean that the "rocks" you hold spit out a few pennies magically every so often. While fewer stocks today pay a dividend, many still do. For holding bonds you get the coupon payment, which again is like your rocks spitting out pennies every so often. In the real world, companies and governments are paying you to hold their rocks. T…

But dividends are zero-sum. The shareholder gets the money, the corporate entity loses it. The value created is the value created by the company's business operations, which is independent of whether any of the profits are ever distributed as dividends. By analogy, it would be the value of the currency as a currency, i.e. to facilitate productive financial transactions that would not otherwise occur. The reason non-s…

Nah the corporation is the rock - they aren't a market participant so them paying you and your friends a dividend isn't a net loss in the market for rocks. Instead simply holding rocks and not trading them is still generating money for the market participants.

Bitcoin doesn't generate intrinsic value from a business operation - it's just a digital version of a rock. There's no money for it to pay out. Therefore you have to limit the example to the exchange which gives it value, which again is a zero-sum game in a way that traditional markets for business and government equity and bonds is not.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#363

Post by diveanon »

rgreen wrote: post #98

I'm disappointed the author glazed over flash loans since it's such a perfect example of something that did't exist previously. The things that "make you dizzy for free" are the things to pay attention to. In crypto I can borrow effectively limitless money _uncollateralized_ if I pay it back within an atomic transaction. Why is that interesting? It's because it's not something that was ever possible before and there'…

This is a great example.

Flash loans, arb bots, fully autonomous companies interacting via smart contracts.

Its really pretty fascinating.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#364

Post by boc »

tata71 wrote: post #341
boc wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One Tether is the supposed to be = to one USD which is supposed to be in Tether's bank account somewhere. They have like 16 people total and are based in a mailbox in the Caribbean and nobody in the commercial paper markets have heard of them, despite them being one of the largest buyers in the world (in theory). Their "audits" aren't really audits and there's a ton of sketchiness with the firm they chose last time t…

> nobody in the commercial paper markets have heard of them You've spoken to Evergrande and friends? > to buy BTC you really first bought Tether (or USDC) and then traded your tether for BTC a minute later Nnnnno, not everyone uses sketchy and/or first-gen CEXs...

I don't think I need to explain how risky it is to buy subprime commercial paper denominated in non-US currency to back up your USD reserves. It's not like Evergrande is teetering on the verge of a massive default or anything...

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#365

Post by DangitBobby »

G3rn0ti wrote: post #331
shagie wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An article from a bit ago to put approximate scale of the services - https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ethicallivingblog/20... > Climate researchers say two Google searches emit 7g of CO2 – the same as boiling an electric kettle. > ... > If Wissner-Gross is correct then 3,500 tonnes of CO2 (500m x 0.000007 tonnes) are emitted every day through all of us performing Google searches. Or put another way, 1.28m tonn…

While I am sympathetic with your argument, don’t forget you’re just comparing energy consumptions. We don’t know much about how its energy is being created. If 90% of Bitcoin’s energy use would be from renewables its CO2 footprint wouldn’t be 45x as large as that of Google. There was a study a couple of years ago suggesting Bitcoin’s global footprint is comparable to that of a medium sized city. But its assumptions a…

That green energy would have been used by someone else if BTC didn't use it. Put another way, if there had been one energy customer, X, instead of BTC + X, and availability of green energy was X + BTC/2, then fuelling BTC required generation of non-renewable energy.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#366

Post by Karrot_Kream »

boc wrote: post #348
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well not necessarily - nobody actually paid them anything yet, so they have realized exactly $0 in gains. Except that they still have a rock that the market currently values at $10. The value of that clearly isn't zero, because it's $10. The argument that not everybody could sell their rocks all at once and still get the same price is only relevant if that's what happens. It's like saying your shares in an S&P 500…

And you've set me up perfectly for the real point: stocks generate dividends. Dividends mean that the "rocks" you hold spit out a few pennies magically every so often. While fewer stocks today pay a dividend, many still do. For holding bonds you get the coupon payment, which again is like your rocks spitting out pennies every so often. In the real world, companies and governments are paying you to hold their rocks. T…

Many stocks do not pay out dividends. Tech stocks from Amazon, Facebook, and Alphabet are great examples. The riches that these employees received through their rising stock prices has nothing to do with market expectations of dividends.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#368

Post by AnthonyMouse »

boc wrote: post #362
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But dividends are zero-sum. The shareholder gets the money, the corporate entity loses it. The value created is the value created by the company's business operations, which is independent of whether any of the profits are ever distributed as dividends. By analogy, it would be the value of the currency as a currency, i.e. to facilitate productive financial transactions that would not otherwise occur. The reason non-s…

Nah the corporation is the rock - they aren't a market participant so them paying you and your friends a dividend isn't a net loss in the market for rocks. Instead simply holding rocks and not trading them is still generating money for the market participants. Bitcoin doesn't generate intrinsic value from a business operation - it's just a digital version of a rock. There's no money for it to pay out. Therefore you h…

> Nah the corporation is the rock - they aren't a market participant so them paying you and your friends a dividend isn't a net loss in the market for rocks.

Except that it makes the rocks not worth as much.

You had a corporation with a million dollar business and a million dollars in cash. It pays out the million dollars in cash as dividends. Now the rockholders have a million dollars in rocks and a million dollars in cash, when they used to have two million dollars in rocks. Their rocks decline in value by the amount of cash no longer inside the corporation.

> Bitcoin doesn't generate intrinsic value from a business operation

Sure it does.

Bob wants to buy something from El Salvador, the merchant in El Salvador wants payment in Bitcoin, so Bob has to buy some Bitcoin in order to pay the merchant. The more Bobs there are, the more valuable Bitcoin is as a currency, and the more the person holding the rock can get for the rock.

You, the holder of rocks, get the increase in business value as "rock price appreciation" rather than dividends, but you still get it.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#369

Post by lottin »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #315
narrator wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing I think driving Bitcoin is that all the other assets that can absorb billions of dollars in liquidity are throughly manipulated. A trillion dollars goes into Sovereign Debt. The government can issue endless sovereign debt to dilute that. A trillion dollars goes into the stock market. The companies on the stock market can issue tons and tons of new shares to dilute that. A trillion dollars goes into paper go…

> A trillion dollars goes into bitcoin, the price just goes up and there's no dilution. Isn't someone just going to create a Bitcoin-denominated derivative or fractional reserve bank, assuming that hasn't already happened?

Not just a derivative, bitcoin itself can be inflated via partially-backed bitcoin deposits at exchanges. In other words, the moment exchanges decide to lower their reserve ratio from 1 to less than 1, the supply of bitcoins in circulation will increase as a result. And, as you point out, we don't know that this hasn't already happened.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#370

Post by Karrot_Kream »

boc wrote: post #313
InvertedRhodium wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is Tethers relationship to Bitcoin? I thought they had their own coin.

One Tether is the supposed to be = to one USD which is supposed to be in Tether's bank account somewhere. They have like 16 people total and are based in a mailbox in the Caribbean and nobody in the commercial paper markets have heard of them, despite them being one of the largest buyers in the world (in theory). Their "audits" aren't really audits and there's a ton of sketchiness with the firm they chose last time t…

USDC and Tether are _not_ the same thing. They're collateralized and distributed differently; the only similarity they have is being stablecoins. That's like saying potatoes and carrots are the same thing because they're vegetables.
Post reply on HN