6 ms·

Well, like all crypto you can buy it and hope it goes up in value :) But as for actual usage, it's a smart contracts blockchain that is fast, proof of stake, y

by fleddr 5y ago

Well, like all crypto you can buy it and hope it goes up in value :) But as for actual usage, it's a smart contracts blockchain that is fast, proof of stake, yet has drastically lower fees than Ethereum. Anything can be built on top of it but this particular rush was caused by a second hype wave of NFTs. As more people want to join the NFT frenzy, it got really expensive to mint one on Ethereum, hence people rushed to this alternative. For the record, I don't own any solana and never have, just explaining what it is. I wish I did own it a year ago though.

pionar 5y ago
> Well, like all crypto you can buy it and hope it goes up in value :) So, speculation. That's what all crypto is for.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  And just like many stocks that don't plan to ever offer dividends.
  - CPLX 5y ago
    There's another use case for those stocks. You can buy a whole bunch of them and then you get to run the company. If you buy enough GM stock eventually you can give all your friends and family members Corvettes for Christmas. Stock actually represents an enforceable claim on wealth that exists in the real world. Crypto not so much.
    - fleddr 5y ago
      Both the typical stock holder and crypto holder see a number on screen and hope it goes up. That's it. Most stock trading is done by algorithms, not even people. A typical stock holder can never claim any underlying asset nor do they have voting rights, so you're really stretching. The difference is simply in risk appetite. People are going to keep drinking Coca Cola at large scale so owning their stock is low risk. But also low return. Crypto is high risk, extremely high return. There's a sizable chance to lose your money but a larger chance to get returns that are astronomical. I'm talking 5x - 10x in mere months.
      - headmelted 5y ago
        “There’s a sizeable chance to lose your money but a larger chance to get returns that are astronomical” Past performance is not indicative of future returns.
        fleddr 5y ago
        Yes, and live life to the fullest. Are we exchanging cliches now?
        headmelted 5y ago
        No, but you’re strongly implying that there’s significantly more chance of making a large return than losing a lot of money, which you have no way of knowing. The reason the rest of us on the other side of this fence aren’t being as loud is not because we consider the jury to be out - it’s because we’re being responsible with our claims. It’s why no-one is countering you with a claim that it’s all going to zero - as no-one can guarantee that will happen either. Joining the cryptocurrency pyramid in 2021 and expecting 500% returns is foolish. Could it happen? Sure it could. It doesn’t make it as likely as those inside the religion are implying.
        fleddr 5y ago
        Skilled crypto day traders make money whether it goes up or down, that's what a large volatility makes possible. In fact, a real pro flips the charts: green when down, red when up.
  - throaway6942 5y ago
    tbh, Solana does offer "dividends" in the form of PoS rewards!
  - colinmhayes 5y ago
    Buybacks are dividends. There are no companies that have no plan to ever offer buybacks or dividends.
CPLX 5y ago
Indeed. The only use case is gambling. Unregulated gambling at that. The parent's comment's "For no reason at all except gambling" was implied and likely not confusing to the reader. Also happens to pretty clearly answer the question of why people have extremely serious concerns about all this.
- fleddr 5y ago
  If you've already made up your mind that crypto is a scam and gambling only, despite it being an enormous space, there's no point in asking. https://solana.com/ecosystem https://solana.com/ecosystem The above shows the 400 or so things built on top of solano. I would expect for most projects to not be very useful to the masses and likely most will fail. Which isn't different at all to the typical startup scene. I consider most of it garbage, and I would expect you to conclude the same. Which is fine. The only counter point I have is to not dismiss the entire space as a whole. Things are moving very fast, and some concepts are intellectually interesting, just poorly executed. For example, NFTs are considered the most ridiculous thing ever now, but that doesn't mean they will be in this state forever. The next-gen NFT containing the actual art, copyright integration, and smart contract integration are a matter of time. Imagine a photographer, currently sharing photos to stock services for pennies, with zero control over terms. Middle men milking them dry. With a fully integrated NFT chain, the photographer can claim and prove ownership and dictate terms. They can decide to sell 10 copies, and dictate that if they are resold, the photographer gets a 20% royalty. The photographer can make higher-end versions available, at higher resolution, wider color gamut and ask more for that version. This independent and advanced type of reselling is hardly possible traditionally. And importantly, 100% of the revenue goes to the creator. NFTs can be entirely interactive, and can be anything. A photo, a song, a 3D model, a plot of land in a game. Imagine being an amateur talented 3D model builder right now, and Hollywood directly buying your model. Which is something that won't happen right now because of B2B contracts and the complexities of dealing with small vendors. Soon it's just the click of a button, done. The possibilities of making a "digital living" will drastically expand. Outside of objects having serious undisputed value (like 3D models), you may think nobody cares if you "own" the rights to a JPG. One can trivially copy it after all. This attitude, that all digital content is worthless and frankly has no owner, is curious. Even more so in a society almost fully digital. Take Instagram, for example. Instagram takes everybody's photos for free and intermixes it with ads. Facebook gets 100% of the revenue and personal data, and you as the person actually creating the photo gets...fuck all. A 100% tax. In return you get "likes" or "exposure". Instagram may change terms at will, bury your photos in favor of video, or simply deplatform you. I find this contradiction interesting. The Hackernews community rightfully challenges Big Tech on a daily basis yet refuses to spend a single thought cycle on the only concept that has the potential to break it down. Which is not regulation, it's the opposite: decentralization. Returning power and ownership to users.

by fleddr 5y ago

pionar 5y ago

> Well, like all crypto you can buy it and hope it goes up in value :) So, speculation. That's what all crypto is for.

xboxnolifes 5y ago
And just like many stocks that don't plan to ever offer dividends.
- CPLX 5y ago
  There's another use case for those stocks. You can buy a whole bunch of them and then you get to run the company. If you buy enough GM stock eventually you can give all your friends and family members Corvettes for Christmas. Stock actually represents an enforceable claim on wealth that exists in the real world. Crypto not so much.
  - fleddr 5y ago
    Both the typical stock holder and crypto holder see a number on screen and hope it goes up. That's it. Most stock trading is done by algorithms, not even people. A typical stock holder can never claim any underlying asset nor do they have voting rights, so you're really stretching. The difference is simply in risk appetite. People are going to keep drinking Coca Cola at large scale so owning their stock is low risk. But also low return. Crypto is high risk, extremely high return. There's a sizable chance to lose your money but a larger chance to get returns that are astronomical. I'm talking 5x - 10x in mere months.
    - headmelted 5y ago
      “There’s a sizeable chance to lose your money but a larger chance to get returns that are astronomical” Past performance is not indicative of future returns.
      - fleddr 5y ago
        Yes, and live life to the fullest. Are we exchanging cliches now?
        headmelted 5y ago
        No, but you’re strongly implying that there’s significantly more chance of making a large return than losing a lot of money, which you have no way of knowing. The reason the rest of us on the other side of this fence aren’t being as loud is not because we consider the jury to be out - it’s because we’re being responsible with our claims. It’s why no-one is countering you with a claim that it’s all going to zero - as no-one can guarantee that will happen either. Joining the cryptocurrency pyramid in 2021 and expecting 500% returns is foolish. Could it happen? Sure it could. It doesn’t make it as likely as those inside the religion are implying.
        fleddr 5y ago
        Skilled crypto day traders make money whether it goes up or down, that's what a large volatility makes possible. In fact, a real pro flips the charts: green when down, red when up.
- throaway6942 5y ago
  tbh, Solana does offer "dividends" in the form of PoS rewards!
- colinmhayes 5y ago
  Buybacks are dividends. There are no companies that have no plan to ever offer buybacks or dividends.

CPLX 5y ago

Indeed. The only use case is gambling. Unregulated gambling at that. The parent's comment's "For no reason at all except gambling" was implied and likely not confusing to the reader. Also happens to pretty clearly answer the question of why people have extremely serious concerns about all this.

fleddr 5y ago
If you've already made up your mind that crypto is a scam and gambling only, despite it being an enormous space, there's no point in asking. https://solana.com/ecosystem https://solana.com/ecosystem The above shows the 400 or so things built on top of solano. I would expect for most projects to not be very useful to the masses and likely most will fail. Which isn't different at all to the typical startup scene. I consider most of it garbage, and I would expect you to conclude the same. Which is fine. The only counter point I have is to not dismiss the entire space as a whole. Things are moving very fast, and some concepts are intellectually interesting, just poorly executed. For example, NFTs are considered the most ridiculous thing ever now, but that doesn't mean they will be in this state forever. The next-gen NFT containing the actual art, copyright integration, and smart contract integration are a matter of time. Imagine a photographer, currently sharing photos to stock services for pennies, with zero control over terms. Middle men milking them dry. With a fully integrated NFT chain, the photographer can claim and prove ownership and dictate terms. They can decide to sell 10 copies, and dictate that if they are resold, the photographer gets a 20% royalty. The photographer can make higher-end versions available, at higher resolution, wider color gamut and ask more for that version. This independent and advanced type of reselling is hardly possible traditionally. And importantly, 100% of the revenue goes to the creator. NFTs can be entirely interactive, and can be anything. A photo, a song, a 3D model, a plot of land in a game. Imagine being an amateur talented 3D model builder right now, and Hollywood directly buying your model. Which is something that won't happen right now because of B2B contracts and the complexities of dealing with small vendors. Soon it's just the click of a button, done. The possibilities of making a "digital living" will drastically expand. Outside of objects having serious undisputed value (like 3D models), you may think nobody cares if you "own" the rights to a JPG. One can trivially copy it after all. This attitude, that all digital content is worthless and frankly has no owner, is curious. Even more so in a society almost fully digital. Take Instagram, for example. Instagram takes everybody's photos for free and intermixes it with ads. Facebook gets 100% of the revenue and personal data, and you as the person actually creating the photo gets...fuck all. A 100% tax. In return you get "likes" or "exposure". Instagram may change terms at will, bury your photos in favor of video, or simply deplatform you. I find this contradiction interesting. The Hackernews community rightfully challenges Big Tech on a daily basis yet refuses to spend a single thought cycle on the only concept that has the potential to break it down. Which is not regulation, it's the opposite: decentralization. Returning power and ownership to users.