3 ms·

> it's possible to have a crypto crash without affecting the general economy. This is only true because the only people (to within a rounding error) using cryp

> it's possible to have a crypto crash without affecting the general economy. This is only true because the only people (to within a rounding error) using cryptocurrencies are speculators, scam artists, and their victims. If cryptocurrency ever became what its proponents suggest—a mainstream currency in general use—then these crashes would affect regular people and the general economy just as the ones mentioned in the 1800s did.

AnthonyMouse 4y ago
Not so. The crashes only significantly affect people holding significant amounts of the currency, i.e. speculators. Ordinary people continue to hold the bulk of their assets in US dollars in banks (or shares of the S&P 500 or real estate or some other non-crypto thing). Meanwhile it could enable technologies like P2P social media where distributed hosts get paid in crypto for providing network services without needing a centralized payments intermediary and various other things.
- shagie 4y ago
  The amount of "significance" isn't a question of the portion of the total "market cap" for the cryptocurrency but rather the portion of the personal holdings. There are a lot of people who have put a few thousand dollars that they couldn't really afford to lose on the promise that this was the future of money and that they needed to get in on the ground level. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/19/the-money-is-gone-people-who-lost-out-in-ftxs-collapse https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/19/the-money... > ‘A lot of us feel cheated’ William, a construction site manager from California, was woken by a text from friends about potential trouble at FTX in the early hours of 8 November. At the time, the 40-year-old had about $85,000 of fiat currencies on the exchange, plus three bitcoins worth about $55,000 and about $10k in other altcoins - a significant chunk of his assets. Bitcoin and other crypto currencies are not the domain of the millionaires and billionaires. Yes, these people are speculators - but they're ordinary people with incomes much closer to the median than likely you or I.
  - AnthonyMouse 4y ago
    > Yes, these people are speculators - but they're ordinary people with incomes much closer to the median than likely you or I. That doesn't make them not speculators. Speculation comes with risk. If schools are teaching ordinary people to put a significant fraction of their net worth into speculative investments, the solution is better schools, not banning things.
- danaris 4y ago
  I'm...not sure I understand the contradiction here? You appear to be stating that cryptocurrencies could hypothetically exist and Do Things beyond fraud and speculation without many mainstream people using or caring about them. While this is (again, hypothetically) true, I don't think it refutes my claim that the only reason cryptocurrency crashes don't affect the general economy is because most people don't use them (and the few uses they do have are almost entirely negatives). Indeed; I think what it does is posit a world where most people don't use cryptocurrencies...and crashes could still affect the general economy, through the medium of the (hypothetical) non-scammy, non-speculative uses of cryptocurrencies. Because unless you're proposing a system where people just keep trading around the same tokens, which have absolutely no ability to pay rent, buy food, or otherwise improve their lives outside of these very niche "P2P social media" areas, you're not talking about a currency. You're talking about some kind of a "social media score".

AnthonyMouse 4y ago

Not so. The crashes only significantly affect people holding significant amounts of the currency, i.e. speculators. Ordinary people continue to hold the bulk of their assets in US dollars in banks (or shares of the S&P 500 or real estate or some other non-crypto thing). Meanwhile it could enable technologies like P2P social media where distributed hosts get paid in crypto for providing network services without needing a centralized payments intermediary and various other things.

shagie 4y ago
The amount of "significance" isn't a question of the portion of the total "market cap" for the cryptocurrency but rather the portion of the personal holdings. There are a lot of people who have put a few thousand dollars that they couldn't really afford to lose on the promise that this was the future of money and that they needed to get in on the ground level. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/19/the-money-is-gone-people-who-lost-out-in-ftxs-collapse https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/19/the-money... > ‘A lot of us feel cheated’ William, a construction site manager from California, was woken by a text from friends about potential trouble at FTX in the early hours of 8 November. At the time, the 40-year-old had about $85,000 of fiat currencies on the exchange, plus three bitcoins worth about $55,000 and about $10k in other altcoins - a significant chunk of his assets. Bitcoin and other crypto currencies are not the domain of the millionaires and billionaires. Yes, these people are speculators - but they're ordinary people with incomes much closer to the median than likely you or I.
- AnthonyMouse 4y ago
  > Yes, these people are speculators - but they're ordinary people with incomes much closer to the median than likely you or I. That doesn't make them not speculators. Speculation comes with risk. If schools are teaching ordinary people to put a significant fraction of their net worth into speculative investments, the solution is better schools, not banning things.
danaris 4y ago
I'm...not sure I understand the contradiction here? You appear to be stating that cryptocurrencies could hypothetically exist and Do Things beyond fraud and speculation without many mainstream people using or caring about them. While this is (again, hypothetically) true, I don't think it refutes my claim that the only reason cryptocurrency crashes don't affect the general economy is because most people don't use them (and the few uses they do have are almost entirely negatives). Indeed; I think what it does is posit a world where most people don't use cryptocurrencies...and crashes could still affect the general economy, through the medium of the (hypothetical) non-scammy, non-speculative uses of cryptocurrencies. Because unless you're proposing a system where people just keep trading around the same tokens, which have absolutely no ability to pay rent, buy food, or otherwise improve their lives outside of these very niche "P2P social media" areas, you're not talking about a currency. You're talking about some kind of a "social media score".