Live data from Hacker News

Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

stephendiehl.com

391–400 of 561 posts

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Used to be, but now it's agree to paint Musk's fence in exchange for nothing, or else you aren't even allowed to exist, because the system has been thoroughly gamed. Usually when a metric becomes too gamed it's imperative that we stop using it as a metric (Goodhart's law) or else very bad things happen.

I live a perfectly fine, productive life not contributing to musk's empire. Are y'all really buying Teslas and blue twitter checks? The fact that he has a bunch of money really has no bearing on me.

You're not accounting for all of the government contracts that US taxpayers fund.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "Debt to whom, and what outcomes does that person value?" question is important. It may be, but it is one you, the employer, can easily ask during the interview. If a prospective employee doesn't align with your values, you don't have to hire them, and thus won't have to make them any promises to deliver anything that you don't feel comfortable with. This isn't only theoretical. "Cultural fit" is considered by…

If the debts were spread around evenly, I'd agree with you. But the vast majority of debt is not peer to peer, but instead goes through a bank. If you're going to restrict a bank from using your mortgage to enable loans for endeavors that will hurt you (or selling the debt to somebody who will do this), I think you do need a new kind of accounting.

Accounting predates banks. You do not need to invent some kind of new accounting system to rid yourself of banks.

That said, banks do provide a useful service for many people. However, that service doesn't magically happen. One has to choose the bank they are comfortable employing. Which, again, requires an interview before accepting a bank to work for you. That is where you can make sure the bank you choose to utilize the services of aligns with your "cultural fit".

Talking to the people in your life is all you need here.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Used to be, but now it's agree to paint Musk's fence in exchange for nothing, or else you aren't even allowed to exist, because the system has been thoroughly gamed. Usually when a metric becomes too gamed it's imperative that we stop using it as a metric (Goodhart's law) or else very bad things happen.

I live a perfectly fine, productive life not contributing to musk's empire. Are y'all really buying Teslas and blue twitter checks? The fact that he has a bunch of money really has no bearing on me.

> Are y'all really buying Teslas and blue twitter checks? The fact that he has a bunch of money really has no bearing on me.

The lives of many people who have never given Elon Musk a dime have been materially worsened by the fact that he has a bunch of money, since that money bought political power and he used it in a way that was very destructive to a lot of people across the globe.

Happy for you that you weren't impacted, but a lot of people were and still will be.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#394
post #276
post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fiat currency isn't just a matter of belief or stories. If you interact with the US financial system in any significant way then you're likely to end up owing some income taxes, and those can only be paid in US dollars. If you don't pay then eventually law enforcement officers will seize your assets (real estate, cattle, gold, cryptocurrency, whatever) by force and auction them off to settle your tax debt. And if you…

While that is true, the overarching point is that it fundamentally still is, just a story. You're just describing real world consequences, precisely because humans/societies believe in that story and enforce it.

By that logic, most everything other than a club to the head is "just stories". Hume points out in a Treatise on Human Nature that most of how we interact with the world is through a coherent hallucination provided by sense organs that tell very narrow stories, but when stitched together form a cohesive whole. You're almost doing the equivalent of saying that gravity is "just a theory".

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#395

I think the problem of crypto for mainstream usage was that it had no real purchasing power on its own. Every time you want to buy a good with crypto you have to pay the current market value of the coin in the local currency. There is usually no way to buy something for a fixed bitcoin value because at the end everyone want to exchange it for "real" money. Without this it's always just a something to speculate on and…

Wow, such a great point. I think a lot of early Doge users were all about "1 doge = 1 doge" and leaving out any thought of fiat. A lot of early btc users were like "why is this worth so much, you can't even buy anything with it."

Also, proof-of-work has inherent but not intrinsic value. Gold and silver have utility, beauty and scarcity. Imagine if a coin could guarantee tokens in terms of locking in future AI compute for yourself (future proof-of-work.) Perhaps micropayments could skip the whole "what's this going to be worth in the real world" type thinking too.

So bitcoin has value like a spare tire does. Most of the time it'll just add fuel costs and reduce car performance, but when you need it and you don't have it you'll wish you did. So the value is really somewhere in between its boom-bust price cycle that was predicted early on. I mean, it's just an insurance policy in case something goes wrong with fiat.

On that note, it should really be buy-hold-forget and use only when you absolutely must. Just like insurance. Anything else and you're setting yourself up for disappointment or a windfall that may never happen.

Also, by integrating real-world assets into the blockchain via tokenization, crypto-currency loses some of this purity. It's a different use case and viewpoint and some may even say it is antithetical to the underlying purity. Yet, by making crypto more stable in terms of usage patterns, and generally more usable as a whole, its real-world value should in theory become more apparent. More government adoption and acceptance would also help.

You may not easily be able to walk across a border with a bag of cash or gold coins, but you can with a piece of paper or memorized URL. So what's that worth to someone? Far better than nothing at all.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#396
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you just described cash.

That's the idea---to my mind---that's worthwhile for crypto to work toward. Something that has all the traits of cash but that can be used over the internet.

This. Something that elevates cash, can be cash, and go back to digital.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live a perfectly fine, productive life not contributing to musk's empire. Are y'all really buying Teslas and blue twitter checks? The fact that he has a bunch of money really has no bearing on me.

Somebody sells a tesla and then buys something from you with that money... and now you're contributing to musk's empire. Our money is set up so that you're not in a position to consent to it or even be aware of it.

Sounds like I sold something and therefore made money! glad to hear my business is doing well.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#399
post #50

I've been deep into crypto for years and I was a big stablecoin supporter. I was fascinated by the tech and I still am. But everything outside the tech itself is just trash, scams, and gambling. I've come to believe that "pure" decentralization is neither practical nor particularly convenient. The only real use case that makes sense to me is giving people in developing countries access to a stable currency they can a…

Exactly. Cryptocurrency is useful as as a backup system against failing/weak institutions. Just that. Like insurance, it was not there to make anyone's lives better but simply to become a safeguard to avoid complete collapse.

> Just that. Like insurance, it was not there to make anyone's lives better

This is revisionism. That is not at all how it started.

Re: Crypto in 2026: Oh, This Is the Bad Place

#400
post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or if you read Sapiens you'll know money is a story we tell each other. You can't literally do much with a coin or bank note or numbers on a screen but as long as we all believe it has value, it does. It becomes part of the culture, as you say. Crypto also has to tell a story about why it's valuable. There was a lot of anti government rhetoric and fear mongering (from libertarians) but the public never really believe…

Honestly as much as people complain the US Federal Reserve really just proved their enormous value and thoroughly vindicated fiat currency. The financial crisis of 2007-8 should have been a new Depression and it wasn't. Instead we've seen uninterrupted growth for close to 20 years. Markets have really internalized that the US economy is indestructible and the Fed will always protect us from disaster. Will it last for…

Banks racked up huge losses on subprime mortgages, get bailed out to save customer deposits which the banks continue to profit from, most bank execs walk away scot-free, and that's a vindication of the system? They literally gambled with customer funds, lost it all by enriching incompetent sellers of bad MBS, and got it replaced by the government. With the money supply being inflated from the replacement, the only people who benefitted were the bad actors who still have a share of the now diluted supply of customer funds.
Post reply on HN