5 ms·

Not sure if you're just being sarcastic, but I actually find that to be an interesting comparison.

by drvdevd 10y ago

cperciva 10y ago
Not sarcastic, but both numbers are somewhat meaningless since the prices depend on having only a small proportion of the stock being traded.
- drvdevd 10y ago
  Ok so I suppose you're referencing what I found to be interesting about your first comment: you can compare IPv4 to Bitcoin in terms of artificial scarcity, which you're also saying makes it a somewhat meaningless comparison.
  - cperciva 10y ago
    I'm not saying it's a meaningless comparison; I'm saying it's a comparison between meaningless numbers.
    - drvdevd 10y ago
      Ah OK I see. I think what's so interesting to me about comparing bitcoin to IPv4 is that the latter is an artifact of artificial scarcity based on history rather than deliberate design. I'm sure others have noticed this parallel before, of course.
- csomar 10y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your comment. Is most of the Gold in the world traded? The same for currencies and stocks. Unless I'm missing something.
  - cperciva 10y ago
    No, most of the gold in the world is not traded; but I don't remember ever hearing people talk about the "market capitalization of gold". Most stocks have a rational basis for their price beyond mere scarcity: They pay dividends, or are expected to pay dividends eventually. Newly IPOed startups are something of an exception to this rule (lots of people chasing a small number of "hot" shares) and it's not surprising that they often have mythical market capitalizations.
    - iaw 10y ago
      You're half right, but you ignore market dynamics. Silver Tuesday [0] is a good scenario where the value of a precious metal was inflated due to the behavior of market participants and not an intrinsic value of the material. There is a rational basis for everything's price but scarcity and signaling making up huge components of that rationale. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday
    - beambot 10y ago
      Here, from Warren Buffett: http://fortune.com/2012/02/09/warren-buffett-why-stocks-beat-gold-and-bonds/ http://fortune.com/2012/02/09/warren-buffett-why-stocks-beat... > Today the world’s gold stock is about 170,000 metric tons. If all of this gold were melded together, it would form a cube of about 68 feet per side. (Picture it fitting comfortably within a baseball infield.) At $1,750 per ounce -- gold’s price as I write this -- its value would be about $9.6 trillion. He then goes on to say why he doesn't care for it: it's not a productive asset.

Not sure if you're just being sarcastic, but I actually find that to be an interesting comparison.

by drvdevd 10y ago

Not sure if you're just being sarcastic, but I actually find that to be an interesting comparison.

Not sarcastic, but both numbers are somewhat meaningless since the prices depend on having only a small proportion of the stock being traded.

drvdevd 10y ago
Ok so I suppose you're referencing what I found to be interesting about your first comment: you can compare IPv4 to Bitcoin in terms of artificial scarcity, which you're also saying makes it a somewhat meaningless comparison.
- cperciva 10y ago
  I'm not saying it's a meaningless comparison; I'm saying it's a comparison between meaningless numbers.
  - drvdevd 10y ago
    Ah OK I see. I think what's so interesting to me about comparing bitcoin to IPv4 is that the latter is an artifact of artificial scarcity based on history rather than deliberate design. I'm sure others have noticed this parallel before, of course.
csomar 10y ago
I'm not sure I understand your comment. Is most of the Gold in the world traded? The same for currencies and stocks. Unless I'm missing something.
- cperciva 10y ago
  No, most of the gold in the world is not traded; but I don't remember ever hearing people talk about the "market capitalization of gold". Most stocks have a rational basis for their price beyond mere scarcity: They pay dividends, or are expected to pay dividends eventually. Newly IPOed startups are something of an exception to this rule (lots of people chasing a small number of "hot" shares) and it's not surprising that they often have mythical market capitalizations.
  - iaw 10y ago
    You're half right, but you ignore market dynamics. Silver Tuesday [0] is a good scenario where the value of a precious metal was inflated due to the behavior of market participants and not an intrinsic value of the material. There is a rational basis for everything's price but scarcity and signaling making up huge components of that rationale. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday
  - beambot 10y ago
    Here, from Warren Buffett: http://fortune.com/2012/02/09/warren-buffett-why-stocks-beat-gold-and-bonds/ http://fortune.com/2012/02/09/warren-buffett-why-stocks-beat... > Today the world’s gold stock is about 170,000 metric tons. If all of this gold were melded together, it would form a cube of about 68 feet per side. (Picture it fitting comfortably within a baseball infield.) At $1,750 per ounce -- gold’s price as I write this -- its value would be about $9.6 trillion. He then goes on to say why he doesn't care for it: it's not a productive asset.