4 ms·

I’m sure eventually we’ll see that Wall Street and Big accredit as well as other elite institutions were behind the collapse of crypto.

tsimionescu 3y ago
I think the opposite is true - they were very much behind the rise of crypto, and now they're just divesting and it's naturally collapsing back to a niche technology.
paulpauper 3y ago
they are agnostic. they make money from fees either way, up or down.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  I think two aspects are rather important in viewing Wall Street. They are agnostics so only want to make money. And they are not monolithic. So there is plenty of players are in their own sub-fields and products. Some might want to extract money with crypto from public. And some might. And they might not care if someone else also makes some money as long as they make enough of it themselvs.
qwytw 3y ago
> elite Are you implying that basic understanding of finance and economics makes you a part of some 'elite' these days?
mrweasel 3y ago
Maybe, but I don't think directly as in they orchestrated a collapse. Wall Street have probably extract most of all the lower risk capital available in the crypto-markets and the bailed once things got to heated. Sort of like the gold market, leaving individuals and smaller investors with the toxic investments and all the high risk stuff. What crypto would have need, was for the larger institutions to have stayed long term, but that's not how "Wall Street" works. It's no different from dropping shares in a company once the risk gets to high. The future for crypto, if one exists, is beyond the horizon for Wall Street in terms of a payout. Their lack of support may very well have contributed to the collapse, but I don't think they've actively made plans to destroy crypto-currencies. Crypto mostly collapsed because it failed to be useful. The MasterCard deal was the most useful part and only because it could convert funny money to real money, and very few people used that. MasterCard is likely begin generous when they say "less than 1% of customers". There's no way that close to 1% of MasterCards customers had a crypto-backed card.
red-iron-pine 3y ago
nah. it never took off. i'll believe crypto is a viable currency when people are using it to pay for haircuts, oil changes, and $25 worth of groceries. as it stands it's just a vehicle for finance-tech-bro speculation.

tsimionescu 3y ago

I think the opposite is true - they were very much behind the rise of crypto, and now they're just divesting and it's naturally collapsing back to a niche technology.

paulpauper 3y ago

they are agnostic. they make money from fees either way, up or down.

Ekaros 3y ago
I think two aspects are rather important in viewing Wall Street. They are agnostics so only want to make money. And they are not monolithic. So there is plenty of players are in their own sub-fields and products. Some might want to extract money with crypto from public. And some might. And they might not care if someone else also makes some money as long as they make enough of it themselvs.

qwytw 3y ago

> elite Are you implying that basic understanding of finance and economics makes you a part of some 'elite' these days?

mrweasel 3y ago

Maybe, but I don't think directly as in they orchestrated a collapse. Wall Street have probably extract most of all the lower risk capital available in the crypto-markets and the bailed once things got to heated. Sort of like the gold market, leaving individuals and smaller investors with the toxic investments and all the high risk stuff. What crypto would have need, was for the larger institutions to have stayed long term, but that's not how "Wall Street" works. It's no different from dropping shares in a company once the risk gets to high. The future for crypto, if one exists, is beyond the horizon for Wall Street in terms of a payout. Their lack of support may very well have contributed to the collapse, but I don't think they've actively made plans to destroy crypto-currencies. Crypto mostly collapsed because it failed to be useful. The MasterCard deal was the most useful part and only because it could convert funny money to real money, and very few people used that. MasterCard is likely begin generous when they say "less than 1% of customers". There's no way that close to 1% of MasterCards customers had a crypto-backed card.

red-iron-pine 3y ago

nah. it never took off. i'll believe crypto is a viable currency when people are using it to pay for haircuts, oil changes, and $25 worth of groceries. as it stands it's just a vehicle for finance-tech-bro speculation.