3 ms·
How about the "don't listen to sleazy TV personalities who have incentive to make unsupported claims because they hitched their wagon to crypto and crypto is cr
by jstx1 4y ago
How about the "don't listen to sleazy TV personalities who have incentive to make unsupported claims because they hitched their wagon to crypto and crypto is crashing right now" signal? That seems like a good signal to by too.
Actually if it wasn't crashing, it would still be a bad idea to listen to Kevin O'Leary. Or you could think about whether the majority of smart people are working on crypto (clearly false, there isn't that much crypto work being done relatively speaking), how much work MIT are really doing on blockchain, or how smart the people working in crypto really are (some of them must be), or whether the career choices of these 20-somethings tells you anything more than crypto being a field that pays well (until recently).
I mean Michael Saylor went to MIT, and he's an unhinged lunatic who tells people to borrow money and mortgage their house to buy Bitcoin because it's going to a million.
- 609venezia 4y agoI agree with you O'Leary is probably talking his book. And of course there are examples of highly intelligent individuals running off in irrelevant (or worse) directions. Do you think there is nevertheless some predictive value in the direction that larger cohorts from elite institutions choose to take, even if that direction derives from market effects?