3 ms·

Just checked. Most of them are real Edit: you seem to not know they are real, because you haven't looked into it. Because you don't think it's real. Maybe some

Just checked. Most of them are real Edit: you seem to not know they are real, because you haven't looked into it. Because you don't think it's real. Maybe someone else told you when you asked, but you didn't listen? Edit2: Howard Marks -- the investor -- recently said bitcoin wasn't real. So you're not alone in thinking x-real-thing isn't real!

wpietri 9y ago
Let's see your data. For things that drive fundamentals, I'm looking for data that a given use for Bitcoin has at least 1% market share versus competitor technologies, and hopefully above 15%, so it's clear that the idea has crossed the chasm.
- discombobulate 9y ago
  By 15% penetration, I don't think I can get a 100x return. I've invested aggressively. Don't think that's possible even @ 1%. I'm probably going to be holding some of the assets for a decade. Something like that. Unless the whole thing tanks. Good investment opportunities don't come around vary often. By the next one I should have made the money back (& more). The entire crypto-economy is worth something like 70B. Way smaller than Facebook/Goog/aapl. If you want a sure thing, crypto ain't it! I do think it's a good bet, though (asymmetric). I've used Bitcoin again instead of a wire. Wires don't go on the weekend.
  - wpietri 9y ago
    I'm glad you are happy with your investments, but that seems entirely beside the point we are discussing. To review, gray-area suggested Bitcoin could be a speculative bubble because there's strong exuberance and weak fundamentals. You objected to that phrase, claiming that "it works". I said that "works" is too low a standard for strong fundamentals; for that you need significant use driven by a user value proposition stronger than the alternatives. You claimed, as best I can tell, that significant use is occurring. I am asking you for data demonstrating that. I have been asking Bitcoin advocates for that for years and never received any. You haven't given me any either. Do you have it?
    - discombobulate 9y ago
      Not significant use. Use. I guess there's two questions; 1) does something work? 2) is it popular for a given case(s). This relates to the delta vs substitutes. In the long run. 1 is yes. 2, I believe it will be. We haven't seen 2 much yet b/c time hasn't occured. A) wires are better, as far as I can tell. For speed. B) traditional VCs are investing in token sales, today. C) crypto hedge funds are open today. I never claimed there was significant use. I would argue it's a functioning system & there are strong value props (better than alts). You know there isn't significant use. You want to wait? Wait. I'm fast follower. I like to benefit from new technology. Startups/hackers. That sort of thing. I think other ppl can benefit if they have a look. 99/100 hype is bs. Sometimes though. It's good to be sceptical. I was.

wpietri 9y ago

Let's see your data. For things that drive fundamentals, I'm looking for data that a given use for Bitcoin has at least 1% market share versus competitor technologies, and hopefully above 15%, so it's clear that the idea has crossed the chasm.

discombobulate 9y ago
By 15% penetration, I don't think I can get a 100x return. I've invested aggressively. Don't think that's possible even @ 1%. I'm probably going to be holding some of the assets for a decade. Something like that. Unless the whole thing tanks. Good investment opportunities don't come around vary often. By the next one I should have made the money back (& more). The entire crypto-economy is worth something like 70B. Way smaller than Facebook/Goog/aapl. If you want a sure thing, crypto ain't it! I do think it's a good bet, though (asymmetric). I've used Bitcoin again instead of a wire. Wires don't go on the weekend.
- wpietri 9y ago
  I'm glad you are happy with your investments, but that seems entirely beside the point we are discussing. To review, gray-area suggested Bitcoin could be a speculative bubble because there's strong exuberance and weak fundamentals. You objected to that phrase, claiming that "it works". I said that "works" is too low a standard for strong fundamentals; for that you need significant use driven by a user value proposition stronger than the alternatives. You claimed, as best I can tell, that significant use is occurring. I am asking you for data demonstrating that. I have been asking Bitcoin advocates for that for years and never received any. You haven't given me any either. Do you have it?
  - discombobulate 9y ago
    Not significant use. Use. I guess there's two questions; 1) does something work? 2) is it popular for a given case(s). This relates to the delta vs substitutes. In the long run. 1 is yes. 2, I believe it will be. We haven't seen 2 much yet b/c time hasn't occured. A) wires are better, as far as I can tell. For speed. B) traditional VCs are investing in token sales, today. C) crypto hedge funds are open today. I never claimed there was significant use. I would argue it's a functioning system & there are strong value props (better than alts). You know there isn't significant use. You want to wait? Wait. I'm fast follower. I like to benefit from new technology. Startups/hackers. That sort of thing. I think other ppl can benefit if they have a look. 99/100 hype is bs. Sometimes though. It's good to be sceptical. I was.