4 ms·

"In two or three years, people won’t even talk about crypto ... Names will be taken off arenas." Didn't those crypto.com guys buy a 10-year contract? I really

"In two or three years, people won’t even talk about crypto ... Names will be taken off arenas." Didn't those crypto.com guys buy a 10-year contract? I really think this is wishful thinking by the author. I'm not a crypto fan, but it's undeniable that serious investments are now involved, and really, why is crypto much different than gold, or sovereign currencies? They're all only worth what everyone agrees they're worth, ultimately.

mtoner23 4y ago
Sovereign Countries produce goods and services with their curriences. When people trade dollars the world does things. when people trade bitcoin...
- null0pointer 4y ago
  > When people trade dollars the world does things. when people trade bitcoin... the world continues to do things. The unit of account has nothing to do with actual production.
  - mtoner23 4y ago
    Yes it does, try making a company that does all business in Indian Rupees or bitcoin or whatever other currency. you will find that you produce less. The unit of account absolutely matters
almost_usual 4y ago
Sovereign currencies are backed by military force. Gold has some intrinsic value but is more similar to Bitcoin.
- ricochet11 4y ago
  many of us choose crypto for this reason, it isnt backed by military force. it is backed by the work and collaboration and agreement of people all over the world.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    >> Sovereign currencies are backed by military force. > many of us choose crypto for this reason, it isnt backed by military force. it is backed by the work and collaboration and agreement of people all over the world. You're missing the point. It's not about aesthetics.
    - ricochet11 4y ago
      I strongly believe that ideas like culture, democracy, collaboration, opensource tech, and "doing the work" are stronger and more powerful forces than military enforcement. i dont think that for aesthetic reasons. It IS more robust, there is a better chance of survival.
- notahacker 4y ago
  Sovereign currency isn't really backed by military force so much as it's backed by trillions of $currency being owed in taxes or repayments over a given time period, meaning that obtaining currency has value to individuals and companies with outstanding debt and they're willing to swap goods and services for it. The military force is useful only in the narrow sense that being attacked by neighbours tends to damage the ability to perform services and repay debts and collect taxes, and many nations have perfectly adequate currencies but limited ability to project military power. (And FWIW cryptocurrencies now have some debt repayable in them which helps stabilise their price somewhat, but the markets are relatively thin and short term, and the companies taking on crypto repayment obligations are generally trying to obtain the crypto by swapping for other volatile tokens in a zero-sum bet rather than borrowing to produce real world goods and services to trade or securing their debts against valuable real estate)
  - eldenwrong 4y ago
    It is backed by force. How do you think you collect debts when people don't want to pay?
    - notahacker 4y ago
      Generally they send a payment demand by registered mail or maybe a bailiff or two, not a tank division. The military is useful to ensure property in general is still a thing (including ensuring people aren't rounded up and tortured by enemy soldiers hunting their crypto keys) but doesn't play much role in ensuring that people sell their labour to meet mortgage repayments.
      - eldenwrong 4y ago
        And how do countries ensure debts get repayed when one doesn't want to pay?
        notahacker 4y ago
        I feel like I'm repeating myself, but generally they send a payment demand by registered mail or maybe a bailiff or two, not a tank division. Debt repayment is enforced by exactly the same rule of law and exactly the same law enforcement as the property ownership of anyone else, including cryptofantasists.
dtech 4y ago
Fiat money is backed by a government and the need to pay taxes in it if you want to do business in that market.
ironlake 4y ago
Enron signed a 30 year, $100 million contract for the naming rights to the Houston Astros stadium in 1999. Less than two years later, it was revealed that the entire company was essentially one big accounting fraud.

mtoner23 4y ago

Sovereign Countries produce goods and services with their curriences. When people trade dollars the world does things. when people trade bitcoin...

null0pointer 4y ago
> When people trade dollars the world does things. when people trade bitcoin... the world continues to do things. The unit of account has nothing to do with actual production.
- mtoner23 4y ago
  Yes it does, try making a company that does all business in Indian Rupees or bitcoin or whatever other currency. you will find that you produce less. The unit of account absolutely matters

almost_usual 4y ago

Sovereign currencies are backed by military force. Gold has some intrinsic value but is more similar to Bitcoin.

ricochet11 4y ago
many of us choose crypto for this reason, it isnt backed by military force. it is backed by the work and collaboration and agreement of people all over the world.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  >> Sovereign currencies are backed by military force. > many of us choose crypto for this reason, it isnt backed by military force. it is backed by the work and collaboration and agreement of people all over the world. You're missing the point. It's not about aesthetics.
  - ricochet11 4y ago
    I strongly believe that ideas like culture, democracy, collaboration, opensource tech, and "doing the work" are stronger and more powerful forces than military enforcement. i dont think that for aesthetic reasons. It IS more robust, there is a better chance of survival.
notahacker 4y ago
Sovereign currency isn't really backed by military force so much as it's backed by trillions of $currency being owed in taxes or repayments over a given time period, meaning that obtaining currency has value to individuals and companies with outstanding debt and they're willing to swap goods and services for it. The military force is useful only in the narrow sense that being attacked by neighbours tends to damage the ability to perform services and repay debts and collect taxes, and many nations have perfectly adequate currencies but limited ability to project military power. (And FWIW cryptocurrencies now have some debt repayable in them which helps stabilise their price somewhat, but the markets are relatively thin and short term, and the companies taking on crypto repayment obligations are generally trying to obtain the crypto by swapping for other volatile tokens in a zero-sum bet rather than borrowing to produce real world goods and services to trade or securing their debts against valuable real estate)
- eldenwrong 4y ago
  It is backed by force. How do you think you collect debts when people don't want to pay?
  - notahacker 4y ago
    Generally they send a payment demand by registered mail or maybe a bailiff or two, not a tank division. The military is useful to ensure property in general is still a thing (including ensuring people aren't rounded up and tortured by enemy soldiers hunting their crypto keys) but doesn't play much role in ensuring that people sell their labour to meet mortgage repayments.
    - eldenwrong 4y ago
      And how do countries ensure debts get repayed when one doesn't want to pay?
      - notahacker 4y ago
        I feel like I'm repeating myself, but generally they send a payment demand by registered mail or maybe a bailiff or two, not a tank division. Debt repayment is enforced by exactly the same rule of law and exactly the same law enforcement as the property ownership of anyone else, including cryptofantasists.

dtech 4y ago

Fiat money is backed by a government and the need to pay taxes in it if you want to do business in that market.

ironlake 4y ago

Enron signed a 30 year, $100 million contract for the naming rights to the Houston Astros stadium in 1999. Less than two years later, it was revealed that the entire company was essentially one big accounting fraud.