4 ms·
Did HN have upvoted posts like this when Bitcoin pumped by 13% or whatever? There seems to be a big asymmetry of interest regarding crypto doing well and doing
by redox99 4y ago
Did HN have upvoted posts like this when Bitcoin pumped by 13% or whatever? There seems to be a big asymmetry of interest regarding crypto doing well and doing bad.
- karamanolev 4y agoFrom what I've seen, there's a largely negative sentiment towards BTC. That would lead to better reactions when a massive sell-off happens as compared to the opposite. Some top arguments I've seen are: pyramid scheme; "tulip mania"; wasting electricity / bad for the environment; fosters some amount of crime; doesn't help core use cases that much (anonymity, flexibility, actual decentralized payments).
- was_a_dev 4y agoI think the general opinion people on HN show is that the crypto community make many claims about cryptocurrencies that are true in theory, but false in practice. And then there's the blatant scams and Ponzi schemes. I think the apettite for cryptos failure is understandable.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- nhinck 4y ago> pumped That's a good word for it.
- ls15 4y ago> Did HN have upvoted posts like this when Bitcoin pumped by 13% or whatever? Yes, in earlier days... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7043919 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7043919
- Gigachad 4y agoThe second top level comment is hilarious. Saying they feel sorry for anyone who purchased at $1000 and it’s only going down from there.
- aaaaaaaaata 4y agoMakes one wonder how much the naysayers of today have read from those days for anchoring.
- benj111 4y agoAs a naysayer, anchoring is part of the problem because that's the only way to decide a price. There isn't any intrinsic value, all you've got is a thing that cost you $X and the value of that thing to you is based on that price.