10 ms·

The comparison with the other company makes no sense. A company has a "single point of failure". At this point there's waayy too many actors and people who want

The comparison with the other company makes no sense. A company has a "single point of failure". At this point there's waayy too many actors and people who want Bitcoin to succeed. The market is huge at this point. Like NASDAQ is like 7T IIRC. Crypto is today ~550B. It was like ~750B not too long ago. Note how there's no glue joining the idea of the company and crypto. It could go down but it could also go really up even higher. It's funny how the one thing that North Korea agrees with the West on is how dope Bitcoin is. Like in some sense NK, is very vested in this going well. And re: zero. No, it will never be a literal zero. No buying or purchasing happens when things are priced at zero. EDIT: HN seems to be really anti-crypto. I setup a slack channel right now, if anyone is interested in having a discussion about crypto beyond "what if it goes to zero".

JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> At this point there's waayy too many actors and people who want Bitcoin to succeed This has no relation to whether something goes to zero (or practically zero). Political influence? Sure. But I don't think anyone expects D.C. to bail out Bitcoin. > A company has a "single point of failure" Companies trade after bankruptcy. There are stubs, practical and theoretical, for companies improperly wound up going back decades. Even if a state says "XYZ failed to pay franchise taxes and is now inactive," a shareholder can sue the former directors, holders of proceeds from the company, et cetera. (Company "ownership" is de-centralised and ambiguous, a fact that becomes uncomfortably clear post mortem.) Colloquially, we call "practically worthless," i.e. where the cost of valuing something is likely more than it's worth, zero.
- nxsynonym 9y ago
  Agree. Too big to fail is a terrible, copy-pasta argument that makes no sense. The combined worth of all the crypto-currencies put together is a drop in the global-financial bucket. The only people who would be hurt by a collapse to zero are those trying to artificially pump the price to cash out rich. I used to be anti-FUD, but whatever the term for the opposite is - it's way more infuriating.
  - stcredzero 9y ago
    The opposite of FUD is hype. Or maybe, a specific form of hype?
- adamnemecek 9y ago
  > But I don't think anyone expects D.C. to bail out Bitcoin. What does it mean for Bitcoin to be bailed out? How can Bitcoin "fail"? > But a penny price is as good as zero. Why would it go to zero?
  - baq 9y ago
    > Why would it go to zero? Crisis of faith. There's nothing else behind it.
    - adamnemecek 9y ago
      The thing tho is that people have seen the insane gains it can provide. There will always be buyers. If Bitcoin went to $50 tomorrow, you can bet I would buy a lot. I'm not the only one. It's done magic once, it might again. The point is, there will always be buyers.
      - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
        > The point is, there will always be buyers Someone could have said the same for the Dutch East India Trading Company. "What, will the colonies sink into the ocean?" Note: I'm not saying it will become worthless. But you're grossly underestimating this risk.
      - skykooler 9y ago
        To buy Bitcoin, a miner somewhere has to produce a block with your transaction in it. If the value of Bitcoin falls that much, it will no longer be profitable to mine. With no miners, nobody could buy or sell anything.
        adamnemecek 9y ago
        That was planned for. Like there's only 20million Bitcoins tops.
        9y ago
aphextron 9y ago
Ask yourself what exactly is behind that “~550B”. The answer is nothing but faith. You are comparing the market cap of cryptocurrencies to NASDAQ, a portfolio of the highest profit driving, real asset laden companies on earth. How is this even remotely realistic?
- adamnemecek 9y ago
  All investment is just faith to a certain degree. I own stock that could also go to zero over night. So do many other people. Bitcoin will enable many more exchanges that weren't possible before.
  - aphextron 9y ago
    And here is the inevitable “all money is just faith” argument. Investing has nothing to do with faith, that’s called speculation. Investment is based on sound financial principals of expected future return based on debts and cash flow, where actual value is being created and added to the economy. This is mania.
- cableshaft 9y ago
  Everything is based on faith to a certain extent. None of us (that I'm aware of) have crystal balls that see the exact future. Even companies that have lots of assets behind them could potentially make catastrophic fuck ups that tank their stock (i.e. BP and their Deepwater Horizon spill) in an instant.
  - ohitsdom 9y ago
    I think you see the point the parent comment was making. Even if BP makes a colossal mistake and their stock dives, at the very least they can sell of their real physical assets. Crypto can actually dive to zero, there is no safety net since there are no physical goods.
    - chrisco255 9y ago
      Crypto as a whole going to zero? It would only go to zero if there was zero utility. Whether or not the market is overvalued at the present, there's plenty of value there.
api 9y ago
People made a version of that argument with mortgages and mortgage backed securities. Mortgages are spread across too many people, too many geographic areas, etc., and there's no way they'll all decline or default at once.
- adamnemecek 9y ago
  Well they were wrong to make that argument. If for no other reason they were all spread across too many people IN THE US, which kinda invalidates the claim.
  - paulmd 9y ago
    Crashes and recessions can be global. In fact, economic interconnection makes that more and more likely. Globalism is not a zero-sum game, everyone can win at the same time, and in fact everyone can lose at the same time as well.
  - diab0lic 9y ago
    But you're not wrong to make that argument, right? The point api is making is that they were sure they were right.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  and there's no way they'll all decline or default at once. This is where Credit Default Swaps came in. What is the cryptocurrency equivalent of a Credit Default Swap?
  - rlucas 9y ago
    It wouldn't be a CDS, it would just be a swap (like a currency swap). A bitcoin isn't a credit instrument, so there's no possibility of default. (Although it's also true that swaps usually anticipate a currency's local interest rate -- what's that for bitcoins?) And, you probably wouldn't use a swap for hedging bitcoin currency exchange risk, unless you were doing an actual useful transaction where the sources and uses were in different currencies. People with bitcoins are either speculating or taking duration risk approximately equal to the delivery delay of a Priority Mail envelope full of heroin, as I understand it.
gspetr 9y ago
> No buying or purchasing happens when things are priced at zero. One could make a good argument that the air is worth zero. Yet one would be wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/12051354/Chinese-buy-up-bottles-of-fresh-air-from-Canada.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/1205135...

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

> At this point there's waayy too many actors and people who want Bitcoin to succeed This has no relation to whether something goes to zero (or practically zero). Political influence? Sure. But I don't think anyone expects D.C. to bail out Bitcoin. > A company has a "single point of failure" Companies trade after bankruptcy. There are stubs, practical and theoretical, for companies improperly wound up going back decades. Even if a state says "XYZ failed to pay franchise taxes and is now inactive," a shareholder can sue the former directors, holders of proceeds from the company, et cetera. (Company "ownership" is de-centralised and ambiguous, a fact that becomes uncomfortably clear post mortem.) Colloquially, we call "practically worthless," i.e. where the cost of valuing something is likely more than it's worth, zero.

nxsynonym 9y ago
Agree. Too big to fail is a terrible, copy-pasta argument that makes no sense. The combined worth of all the crypto-currencies put together is a drop in the global-financial bucket. The only people who would be hurt by a collapse to zero are those trying to artificially pump the price to cash out rich. I used to be anti-FUD, but whatever the term for the opposite is - it's way more infuriating.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  The opposite of FUD is hype. Or maybe, a specific form of hype?
adamnemecek 9y ago
> But I don't think anyone expects D.C. to bail out Bitcoin. What does it mean for Bitcoin to be bailed out? How can Bitcoin "fail"? > But a penny price is as good as zero. Why would it go to zero?
- baq 9y ago
  > Why would it go to zero? Crisis of faith. There's nothing else behind it.
  - adamnemecek 9y ago
    The thing tho is that people have seen the insane gains it can provide. There will always be buyers. If Bitcoin went to $50 tomorrow, you can bet I would buy a lot. I'm not the only one. It's done magic once, it might again. The point is, there will always be buyers.
    - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
      > The point is, there will always be buyers Someone could have said the same for the Dutch East India Trading Company. "What, will the colonies sink into the ocean?" Note: I'm not saying it will become worthless. But you're grossly underestimating this risk.
    - skykooler 9y ago
      To buy Bitcoin, a miner somewhere has to produce a block with your transaction in it. If the value of Bitcoin falls that much, it will no longer be profitable to mine. With no miners, nobody could buy or sell anything.
      - adamnemecek 9y ago
        That was planned for. Like there's only 20million Bitcoins tops.
        9y ago

aphextron 9y ago

Ask yourself what exactly is behind that “~550B”. The answer is nothing but faith. You are comparing the market cap of cryptocurrencies to NASDAQ, a portfolio of the highest profit driving, real asset laden companies on earth. How is this even remotely realistic?

adamnemecek 9y ago
All investment is just faith to a certain degree. I own stock that could also go to zero over night. So do many other people. Bitcoin will enable many more exchanges that weren't possible before.
- aphextron 9y ago
  And here is the inevitable “all money is just faith” argument. Investing has nothing to do with faith, that’s called speculation. Investment is based on sound financial principals of expected future return based on debts and cash flow, where actual value is being created and added to the economy. This is mania.
cableshaft 9y ago
Everything is based on faith to a certain extent. None of us (that I'm aware of) have crystal balls that see the exact future. Even companies that have lots of assets behind them could potentially make catastrophic fuck ups that tank their stock (i.e. BP and their Deepwater Horizon spill) in an instant.
- ohitsdom 9y ago
  I think you see the point the parent comment was making. Even if BP makes a colossal mistake and their stock dives, at the very least they can sell of their real physical assets. Crypto can actually dive to zero, there is no safety net since there are no physical goods.
  - chrisco255 9y ago
    Crypto as a whole going to zero? It would only go to zero if there was zero utility. Whether or not the market is overvalued at the present, there's plenty of value there.

api 9y ago

People made a version of that argument with mortgages and mortgage backed securities. Mortgages are spread across too many people, too many geographic areas, etc., and there's no way they'll all decline or default at once.

adamnemecek 9y ago
Well they were wrong to make that argument. If for no other reason they were all spread across too many people IN THE US, which kinda invalidates the claim.
- paulmd 9y ago
  Crashes and recessions can be global. In fact, economic interconnection makes that more and more likely. Globalism is not a zero-sum game, everyone can win at the same time, and in fact everyone can lose at the same time as well.
- diab0lic 9y ago
  But you're not wrong to make that argument, right? The point api is making is that they were sure they were right.
stcredzero 9y ago
and there's no way they'll all decline or default at once. This is where Credit Default Swaps came in. What is the cryptocurrency equivalent of a Credit Default Swap?
- rlucas 9y ago
  It wouldn't be a CDS, it would just be a swap (like a currency swap). A bitcoin isn't a credit instrument, so there's no possibility of default. (Although it's also true that swaps usually anticipate a currency's local interest rate -- what's that for bitcoins?) And, you probably wouldn't use a swap for hedging bitcoin currency exchange risk, unless you were doing an actual useful transaction where the sources and uses were in different currencies. People with bitcoins are either speculating or taking duration risk approximately equal to the delivery delay of a Priority Mail envelope full of heroin, as I understand it.

gspetr 9y ago

> No buying or purchasing happens when things are priced at zero. One could make a good argument that the air is worth zero. Yet one would be wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/12051354/Chinese-buy-up-bottles-of-fresh-air-from-Canada.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/1205135...