8 ms·

I remember the .com-bubble; it kind of made sense that companies like Amazon were very valuable as they had the promise to transform whole industries. But this

by chvid 9y ago

I remember the .com-bubble; it kind of made sense that companies like Amazon were very valuable as they had the promise to transform whole industries. But this one; it is just stupid. Massive amounts of electricity and hardware wasted to keep a distributed ledger safe; an army of computer nerds facilitating fraud, narcotics sale and money laundry; and finally the bankers sensing bucks to be made on a large number of idiots.

repomies691 9y ago
"Massive amounts of electricity and hardware wasted to keep a distributed ledger safe; an army of computer nerds facilitating fraud, narcotics sale and money laundry; and finally the bankers sensing bucks to be made on a large number of idiots." Well to me that sounds just like business as usual... Except now transactions are stored in a permanent decentralized ledger, unlike before. And also previously there less computer nerds and more bankers.
- epicide 9y ago
  Computer nerds, finance nerds... what's the difference when they're resting on their (others') laurels?
zapt02 9y ago
That's a very one-dimensional view of things. Blockchain technology carries with it the possibility to change how we think about and use money. Bitcoin is a zero-trust system that still manages to hold $41 billion dollar in value. However, I agree that almost all ICOs are cash-grabs. In my opinion we already have coins for all verticals that matter.
- simias 9y ago
  >Blockchain technology carries with it the possibility to change how we think about and use money. That's the type of fluff I keep hearing coming from the bitcoin enthusiasts but I have yet to read a compelling argument about what it'll enable and how exactly. "Bitcoin will kill the banks", "bitcoin will prevent the evil government from stealing your money", "bitcoin will cure cancer and polio". How it'll do any of that and why it's a good thing, that's left as an exercise to the reader. In effect if we look at how bitcoin is effectively used today then the parent is fairly objective I think. There's speculation, more speculation, money laundering, black market stuff, gambling. Oh and did I mention speculation? There aren't many legit use cases where bitcoin beats fiat nowadays, except maybe sending money to a foreign country (and even then it's not certain, what with the high fees and huge variation in the price of late). I still don't understand how people expect it to become maistream. "It's like Visa, but if you make a mistake you may lose all your money with no hope of ever getting it back, it's not accepted everywhere and you have to wait for about an hour to get a confirmation. But hey, you can send money to Burundi super easily with it!" I know, I know, there's SegWit coming, which might address some of these issues. In particular I hear that it'll cure the rabies too. To the moon!
  - dageshi 9y ago
    The internet native versions of previous offline technologies have a long history of revolutionising their respective industries. MP3, video codecs all internet/computer native versions of things that already existed offline but which have swallowed entire markets. I wouldn't bet against cryptocurrencies doing the same thing, that's not to say I know how they're going to do it.
    - simias 9y ago
      The added value of having access to these things online seems obvious though. It just took a while until the infrastructure was here to allow it (good luck streaming 4k video in 1995). Bitcoin is mostly here already, it sorta works. And then what? Besides speculation, illegal activities or simple curiosity, why would I bother? What's the blockchain's Youtube, what's the killer app? What will it let me do that I can't do today with my Visa card, except lose all of my money if I mess up?
      - dageshi 9y ago
        Back in the day nobody could really build an actual profitable business out of mp3, but there's a bunch of industries that've come from mp3 eventually that nobody could quite forsee at the time. Who'd have thought people would give up owning music in exchange for streaming? Who could predict podcasting would grow into such a huge thing? Nobody could tell you what to do with an mp3, nobody could tell you what you could or couldn't put in it or what you could play it on (licensing I know... but you take my point). Mp3 gave everyone the ability to experiment with audio and distribute it in a way that was incredibly difficult before. Crypto currencies do the same I think for money, they are an internet native version of something and that "internet nativeness" implies a level of creativity, flexibility and speed of iteration/evolution that can't be matched by offline equivalents. I understand the questions you're asking and really I have no answers, but I think the "internet nativeness" of something like crypto currencies is not to be underestimated and I think it's why there's so much interest in the area.
  - Master_Odin 9y ago
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  You know, the words "zero-trust" and "money" don't go along well with each other. The current value of BTC comes from trust. It's just not the kind you were expecting it to be.
  - zapt02 9y ago
    What exactly do you mean that the value of BTC comes from trust? The only ones I put "trust" in are the owners of giant mining farms that have the possibility to cross the 50% hashing threshold and break Bitcoin. I also understand that this is not in their best interest. The value in Bitcoin doesn't come from trust in people, it comes from trust in crypto.
    - marcosdumay 9y ago
      You are trusting the miners, yes. You are also trusting that somebody will come and buy those coins back from you (with either products or some other kind of money), and you are trusting that your government won't just decide to take it from you. Money is just another kind of trust.
VMG 9y ago
One the one hand, you list a number of non-speculative use cases, on the other hand, you call the capital investments wasteful. That tells me that your judgement of the wastefulness is subjective. Other people obviously derive value from it.
galfarragem 9y ago
"It's not about the money, it's about the game." -- Gordon Gekko

by chvid 9y ago

repomies691 9y ago

"Massive amounts of electricity and hardware wasted to keep a distributed ledger safe; an army of computer nerds facilitating fraud, narcotics sale and money laundry; and finally the bankers sensing bucks to be made on a large number of idiots." Well to me that sounds just like business as usual... Except now transactions are stored in a permanent decentralized ledger, unlike before. And also previously there less computer nerds and more bankers.

epicide 9y ago
Computer nerds, finance nerds... what's the difference when they're resting on their (others') laurels?

zapt02 9y ago

That's a very one-dimensional view of things. Blockchain technology carries with it the possibility to change how we think about and use money. Bitcoin is a zero-trust system that still manages to hold $41 billion dollar in value. However, I agree that almost all ICOs are cash-grabs. In my opinion we already have coins for all verticals that matter.

simias 9y ago
>Blockchain technology carries with it the possibility to change how we think about and use money. That's the type of fluff I keep hearing coming from the bitcoin enthusiasts but I have yet to read a compelling argument about what it'll enable and how exactly. "Bitcoin will kill the banks", "bitcoin will prevent the evil government from stealing your money", "bitcoin will cure cancer and polio". How it'll do any of that and why it's a good thing, that's left as an exercise to the reader. In effect if we look at how bitcoin is effectively used today then the parent is fairly objective I think. There's speculation, more speculation, money laundering, black market stuff, gambling. Oh and did I mention speculation? There aren't many legit use cases where bitcoin beats fiat nowadays, except maybe sending money to a foreign country (and even then it's not certain, what with the high fees and huge variation in the price of late). I still don't understand how people expect it to become maistream. "It's like Visa, but if you make a mistake you may lose all your money with no hope of ever getting it back, it's not accepted everywhere and you have to wait for about an hour to get a confirmation. But hey, you can send money to Burundi super easily with it!" I know, I know, there's SegWit coming, which might address some of these issues. In particular I hear that it'll cure the rabies too. To the moon!
- dageshi 9y ago
  The internet native versions of previous offline technologies have a long history of revolutionising their respective industries. MP3, video codecs all internet/computer native versions of things that already existed offline but which have swallowed entire markets. I wouldn't bet against cryptocurrencies doing the same thing, that's not to say I know how they're going to do it.
  - simias 9y ago
    The added value of having access to these things online seems obvious though. It just took a while until the infrastructure was here to allow it (good luck streaming 4k video in 1995). Bitcoin is mostly here already, it sorta works. And then what? Besides speculation, illegal activities or simple curiosity, why would I bother? What's the blockchain's Youtube, what's the killer app? What will it let me do that I can't do today with my Visa card, except lose all of my money if I mess up?
    - dageshi 9y ago
      Back in the day nobody could really build an actual profitable business out of mp3, but there's a bunch of industries that've come from mp3 eventually that nobody could quite forsee at the time. Who'd have thought people would give up owning music in exchange for streaming? Who could predict podcasting would grow into such a huge thing? Nobody could tell you what to do with an mp3, nobody could tell you what you could or couldn't put in it or what you could play it on (licensing I know... but you take my point). Mp3 gave everyone the ability to experiment with audio and distribute it in a way that was incredibly difficult before. Crypto currencies do the same I think for money, they are an internet native version of something and that "internet nativeness" implies a level of creativity, flexibility and speed of iteration/evolution that can't be matched by offline equivalents. I understand the questions you're asking and really I have no answers, but I think the "internet nativeness" of something like crypto currencies is not to be underestimated and I think it's why there's so much interest in the area.
- Master_Odin 9y ago
marcosdumay 9y ago
You know, the words "zero-trust" and "money" don't go along well with each other. The current value of BTC comes from trust. It's just not the kind you were expecting it to be.
- zapt02 9y ago
  What exactly do you mean that the value of BTC comes from trust? The only ones I put "trust" in are the owners of giant mining farms that have the possibility to cross the 50% hashing threshold and break Bitcoin. I also understand that this is not in their best interest. The value in Bitcoin doesn't come from trust in people, it comes from trust in crypto.
  - marcosdumay 9y ago
    You are trusting the miners, yes. You are also trusting that somebody will come and buy those coins back from you (with either products or some other kind of money), and you are trusting that your government won't just decide to take it from you. Money is just another kind of trust.

VMG 9y ago

One the one hand, you list a number of non-speculative use cases, on the other hand, you call the capital investments wasteful. That tells me that your judgement of the wastefulness is subjective. Other people obviously derive value from it.

galfarragem 9y ago

"It's not about the money, it's about the game." -- Gordon Gekko