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

371–380 of 636 posts

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#371

Post by lottin »

InvertedRhodium wrote: post #247
NicoJuicy wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bitcoin can be shorted. Bitcoin prints money ( eg tether) Bitcoin just doesn't work. It's centralized now to fix it's issues. Best of all, none is regulated and the whales hold the power. Even more in the future with proof of stake. There is more dilution and misunderstanding with crypto in general then I've ever seen.

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

Most bitcoins are bought with tethers and tethers are issued by Tether inc. Thether inc. claims that tethers are backed by real US dollars, however nobody knows whether this is true and Tether inc. has been shown to have lied about that in the past. In short, the widespread suspicion is that exchanges and other parties are using unbacked tethers to pump the price of bitcoin up.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#372

Post by NicoJuicy »

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…

Almost correct.

But they are the exchange, even if they claimed for long they were not.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#373

Post by grey-area »

narrator wrote: post #164
Animats wrote: post #99

OK. The reason all this happening is that Bitcoin really did go to the moon. That's what powers all this speculation. If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all about MAKE MONEY FAST. Bitcoin found some early use cases. Drugs first. Then getting money out of China. Money laundering. Tax evasion. Scams. Bitco…

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…

all the other assets that can absorb billions of dollars in liquidity are throughly manipulated

Bitcoin is thoroughly manipulated. Tether is minting a billion dollars a day now, with zero oversight and close ties to the major exchanges. Exchanges themselves have been found front running customers, running wash trades on their own coins etc etc. Fraud is rampant in this space and there is zero oversight from the normal regulatory bodies.

A trillion dollars goes into bitcoin, the price just goes up and there's no dilution.

But there is significant manipulation and absolutely no clarity about whether a trillion dollars has in fact gone into cryptocurrencies or whether things like the trillions of dollars that tether has minted affect the price more than real money flowing in. The numbers you can quote from exchanges are unaudited and highly suspect. At least those other assets have some sort of auditing in place to prevent fraud and market manipulation (which still happens, but would of course be rampant and largely hidden without regulation).

Also, Bitcoin is open source. So you can download the Bitcoin code and fork it and call it THE SUPER NEW IMPROVED BITCOIN

Ah, so the supply of this new money is in fact unlimited, since you can add new coins at any time. The supply of bitcoin may be limited (for now, by fiat), but the supply of cryptocurrencies and now nfts is constantly growing, there is no scarcity, and any we have is invented.

If you think Bitcoin is a symbol of resistance you're a mark making the likes of the Winklevoss twins and JL Van der Velde even richer. Get out now if you can.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#374

Post by Karrot_Kream »

jonny_eh wrote: post #101
p2p_astroturf wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tell us something we didnt already know. you can solve the speed problem by using solana or literally any of the other 100 coins that claim to be fast, or eth2 in six months i am not even a person who is a fan of blockchains (since they are mostly poorly designed, unfounded, etc)

> you can solve the speed problem by using solana or literally any of the other 100 coins that claim to be fast, or eth2 in six months I've been seeing this claim for years now. It's gotten quite old.

Algorand also uses Proof of Stake, is much faster than ETH, and supports smart contracts. MSM won't write about it for the same reasons they won't write about a large AWS outage but they _will_ write about a Facebook outage. It's not a conspiracy; it's just not interesting to laypeople yet. The shitshow of art NFTs make for good press.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#375

Post by lottin »

divs1210 wrote: post #349
Animats wrote: post #99

OK. The reason all this happening is that Bitcoin really did go to the moon. That's what powers all this speculation. If the price of Bitcoin had been stable for a decade, and it worked reliably, it would be a useful medium of exchange, but nobody would care. This is all about MAKE MONEY FAST. Bitcoin found some early use cases. Drugs first. Then getting money out of China. Money laundering. Tax evasion. Scams. Bitco…

Not only this, Satoshi had even predicted that the price would be very unstable and grow exponentially before it became stable. Early Bitcoiners have known this and predicted it several times. See this post from a decade ago for reference: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1c5j46/you_people_...

Satoshi also predicted hyperinflation in 2008 after central banks intervened to mitigate the financial crisis. He was most likely a computer scientist, definitely not an economist.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#376

Post by grey-area »

lottin wrote: post #371
InvertedRhodium wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Most bitcoins are bought with tethers and tethers are issued by Tether inc. Thether inc. claims that tethers are backed by real US dollars, however nobody knows whether this is true and Tether inc. has been shown to have lied about that in the past. In short, the widespread suspicion is that exchanges and other parties are using unbacked tethers to pump the price of bitcoin up.

Tether inc. claims that tethers are backed by real US dollars

They don't claim that any more. They only claim a tiny percentage is held in cash now, the rest is in 'commercial paper' apparently.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#377

Post by lottin »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #322
librish wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that for every dollar someone takes out of the crypto eco-system someone else has to put one in. With miners taking their own cut that means the game is actually negative sum for normal people trading in crypto currencies.

For miners it's positive sum. For people who buy cryptocurrency with government-issued currency it's zero sum. They don't show up with cash and go home with nothing. They get that amount of cryptocurrency. They only lose something if the value goes down. Which it might, or it might not.

You're using the term zero-sum incorrectly. Look up zero-sum game.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#378

Post by darkFunction »

dmitriid wrote: post #307
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…

> A winery could sell ownership of wine stored or wine yet to be made. Ah. You mean "a centralized entity creates a centralized way of providing and verifying ownership of wine"? 1. How does blockchain factor into this? 2. As always, descriptions like this betray how little crypto-peddlers know about real world. Buying future wine has been a thing as long as there has been wine https://www.winespectator.com/articles/…

That's great! Hey look I would like to send you the rights to my crate of wine. You're the 1000th customer to my site. Or maybe you want to trade it for your in-game weapon. Or I just like you and it's a gift, anonymous internet user.

Of course I could just transfer directly to your Ethereum wallet. But why do that when I could explain you need to sign up to 'winespectator.com', I'll email them to arrange the ownership transfer, and if you're trading that weapon let's both sign up for a pre-agreed escrow service online and pay them a commission to arbitrage. How many forms do we need to fill in, and who is processing that data? I currently own my crate anonymously- only the person who eventually burns the token will need to provide details to the company for delivery.

As always, descriptions like this betray how little engine-peddlers know about horse breeding. Managing a stable has been a thing as long as there's been horses.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#379

Post by lottin »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #329
KingMachiavelli wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically there is a cost per Bitcoin from the power and other costs that occurred from mining. Some might be not fully lost (GPUs, commodity hardware) but the kWh and custom ASICs are just a sunk cost. If Bitcoin goes to $0.01 or even $5, I bet that makes most mined Bitcoins underwater like how pennies and nickels cost more than their face value.

Now you're talking about revenue vs. profit. That part of the "value" is still created, it just goes to the power company or the ASIC manufacturer instead of the miner. If you mine $100 worth of Bitcoin, there is $100 worth of Bitcoin created, whether the electricity cost you $20 or $120.

This is not how 'creating value' works. If you create something that sells for $100 but cost $100 to be produced, you have created zero value, and if it cost $120 you have destroyed value. In economics this is called added value, it's defined as the value of the output minus production costs. The sum of all added value over a period of time amounts to the GDP.

Re: Web3? I have my DAOts

#380

Post by lottin »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #366
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…

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.

Dividends are distributed profits, and these companies all have made profits. They just didn't distribute them among shareholders. Distributing or not distributing profits is irrelevant as far as shareholders are concerned, since being the owners of the company they own the profits either way.

The important thing that differentiates shares and bonds from other assets such as commodities and virtual currencies, is that the former produce income (in the form of profits or interest) while the latter don't.

Post reply on HN