Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies really have this late-stage capitalism feel to me. Maybe my assumptions are completely skewed on this as I have never had a good feeling towards them since I...
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies really have this late-stage capitalism feel to me. Maybe my assumptions are completely skewed on this as I have never had a good feeling towards them since I started reading about them a decade ago. I'm going to use bitcoin in the rest of my comment, but it extends to all cryptocurrencies.
I can't see the value in a bitcoin. I don't know what makes 1 bitcoin have the same value and purpose as a Tesla (at the current price point). I understand there is some proof of work somewhere on this immutable chain of transactions, but so what? What real-world puzzle was solved? I could see there being some value if the puzzles were like Folding@Home where you are contributing to the advancement of mankind or for some advancement in a machine learning application, but random puzzles seem pointless to me. Before dogecoin blew up, I bought so many at less than a penny a coin. Afterward, I sold it and made a few hundred dollars. Where did that value come from? What made the price of the coin that I bought on Day 1 change it to being worth more if seemingly there is an infinite supply of dogecoin? It's a completely irrational market.
There is no regulation so there is no guarantee that you aren't going to get screwed after hoarding these things. Elon Musk was charged with securities fraud in 2018 for potentially manipulating Tesla stock price with Twitter. This pattern of behavior seems very similar to what he is doing with Dogecoin and Bitcoin. We have no way of knowing if he is manipulating these things for his own personal gain. What happens if another cult of personality decides to throw their weight doing the same thing? This just seems like another way for the rich to suck up more wealth from the lower classes without anyone being any more wiser. Furthermore, the article states that China is mining the hell out of Bitcoin despite their ban on cryptocurrencies. Why? What are they getting out of this? If all of these institutional investors pour all this money into these coins, what is stopping a country like China from crashing the market and causing economic damage outside of their country?
With regards to this article, we are on the precipice of a climate disaster and people are more obsessed with getting these coins, spreading FOMO to average people, and pushing the electricity consumption for these coins ever higher. Nowhere in the value proposition of these coins are people taking a real-world impact on lives of others. These coal plants are being ramped up and will have downstream health effects for people living within their radius. These are increased risks of cancer and asthma for people who are too poor to be able to up and move somewhere else. Bitcoin just seems inherently like it is going to accelerate the effects of income inequality to a far greater amount if this pace continues.
Maybe I'm just a too "old man in the clouds" or something but it's at a point where I feel like I have to avoid cryptocurrency on principle due to the factors I outlined above. I understand that there is a value in the technology itself, but not from the product that is being derived and sold.
This applies to fiat currency as well, doesn't it? Cryptocurrencies are much more decoupled from the realities of people's lives, which makes them more of a speculative asset than a currency. But...
Before dogecoin blew up, I bought so many at less than a penny a coin. Afterward, I sold it and made a few hundred dollars. Where did that value come from?
This applies to fiat currency as well, doesn't it? Cryptocurrencies are much more decoupled from the realities of people's lives, which makes them more of a speculative asset than a currency. But currencies can be speculated on as well, and traded as a commodity in and of themselves. They can have price spikes and crashes. Arguably, much more damaging ones since they result in real-world inflation that wipes out people's ability to buy goods that they need. Hyperinflation is rare but it has multiple real-world examples. What I mean is that there's nothing inherent about cryptocurrencies which make their value less tangible than fiat currencies, or about fiat currencies which makes them more 'real'. It's how they are used.
That being said I'm with you on the other points. I think what makes me actually angry about cryptocurrencies is that they expose what seems to me like a really ugly greed in people. Concerns like energy usage, climate change, pollution - with NFTs specifically, the rights of artists to their work and related things - all these seem to be completely and immediately erased as soon as there's a way to get rich quick. People seem to be throwing away not a few morals to buy into these schemes for personal profit, and it's having a real damaging and reversing effect on movements like, say, shutting down fossil-fuel plants. It's very disheartening to me.
I wonder how many people would be so greedy if there was more equity in the world? Wage growth is stagnant. Jobs are being outsourced. Hyper capitalism takes everything from the lower classes to...
they expose what seems to me like a really ugly greed in people
I wonder how many people would be so greedy if there was more equity in the world? Wage growth is stagnant. Jobs are being outsourced. Hyper capitalism takes everything from the lower classes to feed the greed of those who already have.
In the same way that the lottery is appealing when you have no chances of a good life, why should they be concerned about energy usage, climate change, or pollution? People can't focus on tomorrow when their today is at risk.
We created a system that rewards greed and selfishness, and people then wonder why people are so greedy and selfish. They then conclude it must be human nature. This is then used to justify the...
We created a system that rewards greed and selfishness, and people then wonder why people are so greedy and selfish. They then conclude it must be human nature.
This is then used to justify the system, because it 'exploits' the inherit greed and selfishness of people.
No doubt about it. I grapple sometimes with the fact that a lot of what we have in life is only a given because other people believe in the construct as well. Democracy, currency, right turns on...
This applies to fiat currency as well, doesn't it?
No doubt about it. I grapple sometimes with the fact that a lot of what we have in life is only a given because other people believe in the construct as well. Democracy, currency, right turns on red. And I'm privileged in the sense that I was born into a country whose currency is relatively stable compared to others. It's just that I don't see common people hoarding euros or rubles in the hope they will be billionaires one day. For some reason though fiat just feels a bit different to me. Although I do often wonder what the outcome would have been had the US not moved away from the gold standard. I'm not a finance person so it's just a curiosity.
The NFTs are definitely a sour point in my mind as well. It just seems to me to be a form of DRM?
The value in Bitcoin comes from speculation on its future utility. Right now it’s good for buying illegal drugs online. In the future there could be some kind of financial revolution that...
The value in Bitcoin comes from speculation on its future utility. Right now it’s good for buying illegal drugs online. In the future there could be some kind of financial revolution that eliminates the use of government issued fiat currencies. I don’t think that’s necessarily a good or bad thing. I also don’t think it’s super likely. But Bitcoin was created as a response to the 2008 financial crash. People are waiting for there to be enough momentum behind Bitcoin to propel it to a level comparable to the US dollar.
It would certainly be “interesting” to have one of the major mechanisms that governments have to exert power taken away. If your country has good internet access your country could end up financially anarchized by currency globalism. Whether that’s good or bad all depends on the details.
What does "level comparable to the US dollar" mean? If they are thinking about transactions, the capacity is capped at about 7 transactions per second, it's already at capacity, and more demand...
What does "level comparable to the US dollar" mean?
If they are thinking about transactions, the capacity is capped at about 7 transactions per second, it's already at capacity, and more demand just bids up transaction fees. (It's about $20 per transaction currently.)
Default currency for international trade. World reserve currency. You see a stupid tourist waving a Bitcoin around and know they have money to spend. The Bitcoin network can be improved. But that...
Default currency for international trade. World reserve currency. You see a stupid tourist waving a Bitcoin around and know they have money to spend.
The Bitcoin network can be improved. But that might not happen for political reasons.
Isn't it kind of weird that people bid up the currency least likely to change under the assumption that it will improve? It would make more sense to bet speculate on technological potential by...
Isn't it kind of weird that people bid up the currency least likely to change under the assumption that it will improve? It would make more sense to bet speculate on technological potential by betting on a team that's open to change and actively working on improvements.
What's odd to me is that a decade ago, that was all bitcoin was good for as well. You would think that 10 years and the value increases exponentially that there would be more practical uses. If...
What's odd to me is that a decade ago, that was all bitcoin was good for as well. You would think that 10 years and the value increases exponentially that there would be more practical uses. If bitcoin were to be propelled to a level comparable to the US dollar, what would its ending price end up being?
My very rough math says around $1,000,000 per BTC assuming no new BTC are mined. But it's possible that BTC as a world currency could be inherently more or less valuable than USD as a world...
My very rough math says around $1,000,000 per BTC assuming no new BTC are mined. But it's possible that BTC as a world currency could be inherently more or less valuable than USD as a world currency. Even if BTC were to take USD's current role we could instantly create more wealth due to the flexibility of cryptocurrencies. When money isn't tied to how much physical stuff you have it's kinda fluid.
If you could freeze the world and count up everything and give it a price then you could determine the value of the Earth. But it's not possible to do that, so the world and everything in it has itself a speculative value.
This closely resembles trade, but something is lost. If it were honest trade then you'd be rewarded for guessing that other people will want something and delivering it to them, for a price they...
Before dogecoin blew up, I bought so many at less than a penny a coin. Afterward, I sold it and made a few hundred dollars. Where did that value come from?
This closely resembles trade, but something is lost.
If it were honest trade then you'd be rewarded for guessing that other people will want something and delivering it to them, for a price they are willing to pay. Then you're serving the buyer. If they're a happy customer then you did a good job.
But the value is easier to see if they wanted it for a good reason and there is some schlepping involved. If you actually did some work delivering it to them and you're being rewarded for planning ahead and your customer's desire to make the purchase is something you can respect, then it's going to seem more like honest work. Having contempt for the customers (or them having contempt for you) will drain it of meaning.
But you can't even see the buyer on an electronic exchange, and it's hard to respect someone's desire to buy dogecoin.
When you take something real and strip it down to its algorithmic essence, you're making money playing a trading game. I guess it's okay if everyone is having fun and not losing too much playing it.
Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies really have this late-stage capitalism feel to me. Maybe my assumptions are completely skewed on this as I have never had a good feeling towards them since I started reading about them a decade ago. I'm going to use bitcoin in the rest of my comment, but it extends to all cryptocurrencies.
I can't see the value in a bitcoin. I don't know what makes 1 bitcoin have the same value and purpose as a Tesla (at the current price point). I understand there is some proof of work somewhere on this immutable chain of transactions, but so what? What real-world puzzle was solved? I could see there being some value if the puzzles were like Folding@Home where you are contributing to the advancement of mankind or for some advancement in a machine learning application, but random puzzles seem pointless to me. Before dogecoin blew up, I bought so many at less than a penny a coin. Afterward, I sold it and made a few hundred dollars. Where did that value come from? What made the price of the coin that I bought on Day 1 change it to being worth more if seemingly there is an infinite supply of dogecoin? It's a completely irrational market.
There is no regulation so there is no guarantee that you aren't going to get screwed after hoarding these things. Elon Musk was charged with securities fraud in 2018 for potentially manipulating Tesla stock price with Twitter. This pattern of behavior seems very similar to what he is doing with Dogecoin and Bitcoin. We have no way of knowing if he is manipulating these things for his own personal gain. What happens if another cult of personality decides to throw their weight doing the same thing? This just seems like another way for the rich to suck up more wealth from the lower classes without anyone being any more wiser. Furthermore, the article states that China is mining the hell out of Bitcoin despite their ban on cryptocurrencies. Why? What are they getting out of this? If all of these institutional investors pour all this money into these coins, what is stopping a country like China from crashing the market and causing economic damage outside of their country?
With regards to this article, we are on the precipice of a climate disaster and people are more obsessed with getting these coins, spreading FOMO to average people, and pushing the electricity consumption for these coins ever higher. Nowhere in the value proposition of these coins are people taking a real-world impact on lives of others. These coal plants are being ramped up and will have downstream health effects for people living within their radius. These are increased risks of cancer and asthma for people who are too poor to be able to up and move somewhere else. Bitcoin just seems inherently like it is going to accelerate the effects of income inequality to a far greater amount if this pace continues.
Maybe I'm just a too "old man in the clouds" or something but it's at a point where I feel like I have to avoid cryptocurrency on principle due to the factors I outlined above. I understand that there is a value in the technology itself, but not from the product that is being derived and sold.
This applies to fiat currency as well, doesn't it? Cryptocurrencies are much more decoupled from the realities of people's lives, which makes them more of a speculative asset than a currency. But currencies can be speculated on as well, and traded as a commodity in and of themselves. They can have price spikes and crashes. Arguably, much more damaging ones since they result in real-world inflation that wipes out people's ability to buy goods that they need. Hyperinflation is rare but it has multiple real-world examples. What I mean is that there's nothing inherent about cryptocurrencies which make their value less tangible than fiat currencies, or about fiat currencies which makes them more 'real'. It's how they are used.
That being said I'm with you on the other points. I think what makes me actually angry about cryptocurrencies is that they expose what seems to me like a really ugly greed in people. Concerns like energy usage, climate change, pollution - with NFTs specifically, the rights of artists to their work and related things - all these seem to be completely and immediately erased as soon as there's a way to get rich quick. People seem to be throwing away not a few morals to buy into these schemes for personal profit, and it's having a real damaging and reversing effect on movements like, say, shutting down fossil-fuel plants. It's very disheartening to me.
I wonder how many people would be so greedy if there was more equity in the world? Wage growth is stagnant. Jobs are being outsourced. Hyper capitalism takes everything from the lower classes to feed the greed of those who already have.
In the same way that the lottery is appealing when you have no chances of a good life, why should they be concerned about energy usage, climate change, or pollution? People can't focus on tomorrow when their today is at risk.
A good, though even more disheartening, point.
We created a system that rewards greed and selfishness, and people then wonder why people are so greedy and selfish. They then conclude it must be human nature.
This is then used to justify the system, because it 'exploits' the inherit greed and selfishness of people.
No doubt about it. I grapple sometimes with the fact that a lot of what we have in life is only a given because other people believe in the construct as well. Democracy, currency, right turns on red. And I'm privileged in the sense that I was born into a country whose currency is relatively stable compared to others. It's just that I don't see common people hoarding euros or rubles in the hope they will be billionaires one day. For some reason though fiat just feels a bit different to me. Although I do often wonder what the outcome would have been had the US not moved away from the gold standard. I'm not a finance person so it's just a curiosity.
The NFTs are definitely a sour point in my mind as well. It just seems to me to be a form of DRM?
The value in Bitcoin comes from speculation on its future utility. Right now it’s good for buying illegal drugs online. In the future there could be some kind of financial revolution that eliminates the use of government issued fiat currencies. I don’t think that’s necessarily a good or bad thing. I also don’t think it’s super likely. But Bitcoin was created as a response to the 2008 financial crash. People are waiting for there to be enough momentum behind Bitcoin to propel it to a level comparable to the US dollar.
It would certainly be “interesting” to have one of the major mechanisms that governments have to exert power taken away. If your country has good internet access your country could end up financially anarchized by currency globalism. Whether that’s good or bad all depends on the details.
What does "level comparable to the US dollar" mean?
If they are thinking about transactions, the capacity is capped at about 7 transactions per second, it's already at capacity, and more demand just bids up transaction fees. (It's about $20 per transaction currently.)
Default currency for international trade. World reserve currency. You see a stupid tourist waving a Bitcoin around and know they have money to spend.
The Bitcoin network can be improved. But that might not happen for political reasons.
Isn't it kind of weird that people bid up the currency least likely to change under the assumption that it will improve? It would make more sense to bet speculate on technological potential by betting on a team that's open to change and actively working on improvements.
What's odd to me is that a decade ago, that was all bitcoin was good for as well. You would think that 10 years and the value increases exponentially that there would be more practical uses. If bitcoin were to be propelled to a level comparable to the US dollar, what would its ending price end up being?
My very rough math says around $1,000,000 per BTC assuming no new BTC are mined. But it's possible that BTC as a world currency could be inherently more or less valuable than USD as a world currency. Even if BTC were to take USD's current role we could instantly create more wealth due to the flexibility of cryptocurrencies. When money isn't tied to how much physical stuff you have it's kinda fluid.
If you could freeze the world and count up everything and give it a price then you could determine the value of the Earth. But it's not possible to do that, so the world and everything in it has itself a speculative value.
This closely resembles trade, but something is lost.
If it were honest trade then you'd be rewarded for guessing that other people will want something and delivering it to them, for a price they are willing to pay. Then you're serving the buyer. If they're a happy customer then you did a good job.
But the value is easier to see if they wanted it for a good reason and there is some schlepping involved. If you actually did some work delivering it to them and you're being rewarded for planning ahead and your customer's desire to make the purchase is something you can respect, then it's going to seem more like honest work. Having contempt for the customers (or them having contempt for you) will drain it of meaning.
But you can't even see the buyer on an electronic exchange, and it's hard to respect someone's desire to buy dogecoin.
When you take something real and strip it down to its algorithmic essence, you're making money playing a trading game. I guess it's okay if everyone is having fun and not losing too much playing it.
I saw on reddit someone comparing cryptocurrency to pyramid schemes, you want to get other people involved so that the value of the coin goes up.