5 ms·

I don’t know if you’re serious. Your username does check out at least. I also believe crypto itself is worthless. Only the networks behind them and actually pro

by human 5y ago

I don’t know if you’re serious. Your username does check out at least. I also believe crypto itself is worthless. Only the networks behind them and actually providing a service (transaction validation) have some value. The question is: can the networks survive a crypto crash. How do you pay miners with near zero value crypto? I can see a (sad) future where we will be left with central bank digital currencies only (CBDC).

bb88 5y ago
There's a difference between utility and value. Plastic forks, knives, and spoons have high utility (in that they help us to eat). They have very little value, and can be purchased at any dollar store. So the blockchain doesn't have intrinsic value because the crypto currency doesn't have intrinsic value. Utility, for many use cases, it does have.
- formvoltron 5y ago
  crypto is like the spork
  - bb88 5y ago
    Sporks aren't investment vehicles.
    - human 5y ago
      Best comment ever.
headmelted 5y ago
Pretty sure the parent was being sarcastic (and provocative). In real terms it’s worth whatever the next buyer is willing to pay. It annoys me that people cite the run-up over the last decade as evidence of it’s brilliance when it’s nothing of the sort, but I’d just sound like a loon screaming into the wind. Personally I think it’s worthless. Honestly I suspect Satoshi Nakamoto (if they’re still alive) probably thinks the same; One of the later posts Satoshi made before disappearing was making the point that if it accrued any value at all then it would be useable to transact and therefore viable. The problem is that if that’s true of Bitcoin, it’s also true of all tokens, meaning the scarcity argument is entirely imaginary - if one token is perceived as too expensive then the perception of value will shift to another that’s viewed as ”cheaper” (and thus more likely to “mooon!”), meaning the supply of tokens taken as a whole is actually infinite and arbitrary, rather than scarce, and the value of the cryptocurrency market as a whole is therefore infinitely and arbitrarily small per unit (i.e. worthless). But what do I know? I’m just some loon screaming into the wind.
- bb88 5y ago
  > In real terms it’s worth whatever the next buyer is willing to pay. Yes, that's how scams and con games are played too. I personally can't tell the difference between a cryptocurrency and the classic gold brick scam.
- roenxi 5y ago
  Although I agree with your view there is one aspect you aren't considering - Bitcoin is currently backed by a mining network that is managing to achieve around 200 Exahashes/second or however they measure it. A big number. While at a theoretical level different crypto tokens are the same that will not be how the market plays out. That sort of computing power isn't easily replaced and while it exists Bitcoin is unique. So it does have value at the moment, but the value is not inherent in the protocol.
  - headmelted 5y ago
    Wouldn’t smaller tokens need comparatively lower resources though?
    - roenxi 5y ago
      'Need' doesn't really come in to it, Bitcoin doesn't need that much power. But from a raw value perspective, Bitcoin has something that the other cryptos do not have - a massive network of computing power. That means bitcoins and other crypto currencies can't be simply swapped for each other. Bitcoin is different, for now.
      - headmelted 5y ago
        I've heard this argument, but there's no utility value whatsoever to that power, or the energy consumed to run the hashes (in that the energy and hashing power is spent on the mining task and therefore unavailable for other uses). The argument is essentially that the computing and hashing power has intrinsic value for other use cases it could be reapplied to if not doing this. It could, but that value would accrue to the person selling the energy and/or the hardware, not whoever held the token at that time.
UweSchmidt 5y ago
The "Networks behind them" are also worthless, if you mean blockchain. Consider the oracle problem, the fact that running Hello World requires mining a block, that software contains errors and cannot be patched on the blockchain, the curious absence of real world applications of blockchain after all those years, and the inevitable precedence of the Law in the real world that makes any "the code is the law" ideas moot... A complicated, hard to understand scheme like blockchain is just the right thing to keep the crypto hype going and to attract more of that money that is looking for investment opportunities in this world of overvalued assets and low-interest rates.
- bb88 5y ago
  You could never ever patch log4j.
  - cinntaile 5y ago
    Of course you could, you make a new version of your smart contract or blockchain and people use that instead.
    - UweSchmidt 5y ago
      This defeats the core idea of having something immutable, that no one can mess with. If you can agree to roll out a new version, why not do it with regular software?
      - jakupovic 5y ago
        No it does not. Immutable for use doesn't mean it cannot change for example if the title of your house is on the blockchain when you sell it a new immutable transaction referencing your original immutable transaction would be created. Same as rolling out a new version of log4j
        UweSchmidt 5y ago
        Adding a new transaction in a new block (e.g. for a house sale transaction) is different from undoing software issues (log4j, the "DAO hack" on Ethereum). The former is problematic due to the oracle problem, the latter invalidates the concept of the blockchain entirely; it means I could lose the house because a mining/staking majority, or a vocal group on the Ethereum subreddit agreed to "fix" something on the existing blockchain. That such a sacrilegious thing was allowed to happen is evidence that no one cares except to get rich through the coins they got early (or launched themselves). (Of course there are many more ways I could lose a house that's ledgered on a blockchain, one thing I missed earlier: The impossibility for an individual to operationally secure the secrets for the crypto scheme against theft or loss.)
clippablematt 5y ago
Crypto has “crashed” 50% and more multiple times and has survived so far. If the value goes down the network decreases difficulty of mining so it is cheaper to mine (remember these things started being worth nothing). This also decreases economic security though, we should find some combination of what security is adequate and that will be represented in the tokens. Let’s not end up in that sad authoritarian cbdc future, instead we can build and adopt global foss systems like the ones we’ve been building the past decade. Or we could ignore it all, call it a scam, and let it be captured by VCs and governments.
rvz 5y ago
> I can see a (sad) future where we will be left with central bank digital currencies only (CBDC). And you can take a guess of which cryptocurrencies are going to be the ones powering these CBDCs? Stellar [0], and XRP [1]. The other useless cryptocurrencies with no other use cases such as the memecoins, meme tokens, etc will wither away. [0] https://resources.stellar.org/stellar-for-cbdcs https://resources.stellar.org/stellar-for-cbdcs [1] https://ripple.com/insights/ripple-joins-the-digital-pound-foundation-designing-a-path-for-a-cbdc-forward-future/ https://ripple.com/insights/ripple-joins-the-digital-pound-f...

by human 5y ago

bb88 5y ago

There's a difference between utility and value. Plastic forks, knives, and spoons have high utility (in that they help us to eat). They have very little value, and can be purchased at any dollar store. So the blockchain doesn't have intrinsic value because the crypto currency doesn't have intrinsic value. Utility, for many use cases, it does have.

formvoltron 5y ago
crypto is like the spork
- bb88 5y ago
  Sporks aren't investment vehicles.
  - human 5y ago
    Best comment ever.

headmelted 5y ago

Pretty sure the parent was being sarcastic (and provocative). In real terms it’s worth whatever the next buyer is willing to pay. It annoys me that people cite the run-up over the last decade as evidence of it’s brilliance when it’s nothing of the sort, but I’d just sound like a loon screaming into the wind. Personally I think it’s worthless. Honestly I suspect Satoshi Nakamoto (if they’re still alive) probably thinks the same; One of the later posts Satoshi made before disappearing was making the point that if it accrued any value at all then it would be useable to transact and therefore viable. The problem is that if that’s true of Bitcoin, it’s also true of all tokens, meaning the scarcity argument is entirely imaginary - if one token is perceived as too expensive then the perception of value will shift to another that’s viewed as ”cheaper” (and thus more likely to “mooon!”), meaning the supply of tokens taken as a whole is actually infinite and arbitrary, rather than scarce, and the value of the cryptocurrency market as a whole is therefore infinitely and arbitrarily small per unit (i.e. worthless). But what do I know? I’m just some loon screaming into the wind.

bb88 5y ago
> In real terms it’s worth whatever the next buyer is willing to pay. Yes, that's how scams and con games are played too. I personally can't tell the difference between a cryptocurrency and the classic gold brick scam.
roenxi 5y ago
Although I agree with your view there is one aspect you aren't considering - Bitcoin is currently backed by a mining network that is managing to achieve around 200 Exahashes/second or however they measure it. A big number. While at a theoretical level different crypto tokens are the same that will not be how the market plays out. That sort of computing power isn't easily replaced and while it exists Bitcoin is unique. So it does have value at the moment, but the value is not inherent in the protocol.
- headmelted 5y ago
  Wouldn’t smaller tokens need comparatively lower resources though?
  - roenxi 5y ago
    'Need' doesn't really come in to it, Bitcoin doesn't need that much power. But from a raw value perspective, Bitcoin has something that the other cryptos do not have - a massive network of computing power. That means bitcoins and other crypto currencies can't be simply swapped for each other. Bitcoin is different, for now.
    - headmelted 5y ago
      I've heard this argument, but there's no utility value whatsoever to that power, or the energy consumed to run the hashes (in that the energy and hashing power is spent on the mining task and therefore unavailable for other uses). The argument is essentially that the computing and hashing power has intrinsic value for other use cases it could be reapplied to if not doing this. It could, but that value would accrue to the person selling the energy and/or the hardware, not whoever held the token at that time.

UweSchmidt 5y ago

The "Networks behind them" are also worthless, if you mean blockchain. Consider the oracle problem, the fact that running Hello World requires mining a block, that software contains errors and cannot be patched on the blockchain, the curious absence of real world applications of blockchain after all those years, and the inevitable precedence of the Law in the real world that makes any "the code is the law" ideas moot... A complicated, hard to understand scheme like blockchain is just the right thing to keep the crypto hype going and to attract more of that money that is looking for investment opportunities in this world of overvalued assets and low-interest rates.

bb88 5y ago
You could never ever patch log4j.
- cinntaile 5y ago
  Of course you could, you make a new version of your smart contract or blockchain and people use that instead.
  - UweSchmidt 5y ago
    This defeats the core idea of having something immutable, that no one can mess with. If you can agree to roll out a new version, why not do it with regular software?
    - jakupovic 5y ago
      No it does not. Immutable for use doesn't mean it cannot change for example if the title of your house is on the blockchain when you sell it a new immutable transaction referencing your original immutable transaction would be created. Same as rolling out a new version of log4j
      - UweSchmidt 5y ago
        Adding a new transaction in a new block (e.g. for a house sale transaction) is different from undoing software issues (log4j, the "DAO hack" on Ethereum). The former is problematic due to the oracle problem, the latter invalidates the concept of the blockchain entirely; it means I could lose the house because a mining/staking majority, or a vocal group on the Ethereum subreddit agreed to "fix" something on the existing blockchain. That such a sacrilegious thing was allowed to happen is evidence that no one cares except to get rich through the coins they got early (or launched themselves). (Of course there are many more ways I could lose a house that's ledgered on a blockchain, one thing I missed earlier: The impossibility for an individual to operationally secure the secrets for the crypto scheme against theft or loss.)

clippablematt 5y ago

Crypto has “crashed” 50% and more multiple times and has survived so far. If the value goes down the network decreases difficulty of mining so it is cheaper to mine (remember these things started being worth nothing). This also decreases economic security though, we should find some combination of what security is adequate and that will be represented in the tokens. Let’s not end up in that sad authoritarian cbdc future, instead we can build and adopt global foss systems like the ones we’ve been building the past decade. Or we could ignore it all, call it a scam, and let it be captured by VCs and governments.

rvz 5y ago

> I can see a (sad) future where we will be left with central bank digital currencies only (CBDC). And you can take a guess of which cryptocurrencies are going to be the ones powering these CBDCs? Stellar [0], and XRP [1]. The other useless cryptocurrencies with no other use cases such as the memecoins, meme tokens, etc will wither away. [0] https://resources.stellar.org/stellar-for-cbdcs https://resources.stellar.org/stellar-for-cbdcs [1] https://ripple.com/insights/ripple-joins-the-digital-pound-foundation-designing-a-path-for-a-cbdc-forward-future/ https://ripple.com/insights/ripple-joins-the-digital-pound-f...