3 ms·
This article seems very poorly thought out to me. I'd be interested to hear from people upvoting it what they appreciate about it.
by AlexCoventry 9y ago
This article seems very poorly thought out to me. I'd be interested to hear from people upvoting it what they appreciate about it.
- yeahsure 9y agoAgreed. It's not hard to see that the fear of regulation/bans has a direct relation with Bitcoin's price, which means it's not a completely unregulated free market and thus hardly proof that free markets don't work. He also seems to disregard other cryptos which can easily be used for regular transactions with low fees. Just a bad article really. EDIT: Just realized this was submitted by "Bitcoin_McPonzi", so I doubt they would care about the article's accurate depiction of Bitcoin.
- panarky 9y agoLet me see if I'm following his logic. 1) He thinks Bitcoin should be worth zero 2) People keep paying more than zero for Bitcoin 3) This discrepancy destroys the Efficient Market Hypothesis 4) If the EMH is bullshit then markets for other assets are bullshit since they also rely on the EMH 5) Therefore now the valuation of other assets is also bullshit 6) Regulators should curtail trading in Bitcoin futures since it shows the EMH is bullshit and that undermines all markets Brilliant analysis.
- SAI_Peregrinus 9y agoMy favorite bit about the EMH is that there's a proof that it implies that P = NP. Since that's incredibly unlikely to be the case it's really quite silly to assume the EMH.