4 ms·

What a bizarre bit of strawmanning. The crypto brigade has arrived so this has all gone very desperately defensive. No, that isn't what I said. I said that cle

What a bizarre bit of strawmanning. The crypto brigade has arrived so this has all gone very desperately defensive. No, that isn't what I said. I said that clearly crypto in any rational sense has failed. Not just failed, overwhelmingly, catastrophically failed. It has zero relevance to the broader market. It has retreated from even where it was five years ago, that being a massively failed experiment. BTC has held value because most of the people who hold it didn't "put a ton of money into it". BTC is the very definition of HODL behaviour, with negligible daily liquidity. It is a house of cards.

jrm4 3y ago
Again, I don't see how you're strongly distinguishing failure from extreme volatility? What makes an investment vehicle successful? And perhaps, more do the point -- why is BTC maintaining a pretty high price? Your point on liquidity only stands if you presume what I think a lot of people incorrectly presume: which is, crypto as an alternative to day-to-day currency (edit: or perhaps other generally designed-to-be-liquid thing). Which, I agree with most, it will almost certainly NEVER be. But that doesn't exclude the possibility of crypto as long-term investment/hedge against inflation. I wouldn't necessarily argue that "crypto in the future will definitely be a big and useful thing," but I think it's wildly premature to call it dead.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
tim333 3y ago
Daily spot liquidity is ~usd 3 bn. Not sure that's negligible?
- quickthrowman 3y ago
  ~$800M of SPY traded in the closing 1 minute candle today, ~$40B in total. That’s a single ETF. $3B is peanuts compared to real equity and bond markets.
  - hnfong 3y ago
    That's a straw-man (or True Scotsman?) argument. You're putting up BTC against the most traded ETF in the world, and claiming that BTC has no liquidity because the volume is just 7% of that? There's nowhere in the world where $3B daily volume can be called "negligible".
eaurouge 3y ago
Here's effectively what you said, edited for information: > Every bit of evidence is that the crypto boom has crashed to Earth ... > Yet somehow BTC is still trading at close to historic highs. > ... if it were remotely a functioning market or were at all "real", it would be trading at a tiny fraction of that amount. The fact that it still holds is the best demonstration of how illusory the whole sham is. Which, as others have interpreted, is to say that the valuation (second sentence) is at odds with your perceived reality (first sentence). Therefore (third sentence) it's a "demonstration of how illusory the whole sham is". Those are your words. You can't just alter reality to make them out to mean something else.
- llm_nerd 3y ago
  What reality did I alter? Bitcoin's current value is *completely* irrational and absolutely unjustified. When it had some prospective future, sure some tenuous argument could be made, but now it's basically NFTs -- people collecting worthless things, with so little real (not wash) trading that for a while the illusion holds on. That's the sham. In the same way that GameStop or BedBathandBeyond didn't become retail powerhouses because a bunch of WallStreetBets sorts aped it. You seem to be under delusions that a given niche market is demonstrative of much at all. Crypto was the future. Now it's, for all intents and purposes, dead outside of crime, but as long as there are HODL sorts it can keep up the pretend value.
  - jrm4 3y ago
    A lot of "real" companies are investing in it; which by definition makes it no better or worse than ANY OTHER SPECULATIVE THING. Basically "that's, just like, your opinion, man."
    - llm_nerd 3y ago
      What real companies? Tesla did at the spurring of Musk, and then quietly dumped all of it. A few other "investment" companies occasionally make some statement that amounts to a pump and dump. >it no better or worse than ANY OTHER SPECULATIVE THING Bunching everything together as "speculative" doesn't somehow make them equal. Buying land is not the same as buying an NFT. Buying shares in a bank is not the same as buying Bitcoin. Bitcoin's entire history has been crime and fraud. It temporarily duped the mainstream, but having conned main street it has returned to its crime roots.

jrm4 3y ago

Again, I don't see how you're strongly distinguishing failure from extreme volatility? What makes an investment vehicle successful? And perhaps, more do the point -- why is BTC maintaining a pretty high price? Your point on liquidity only stands if you presume what I think a lot of people incorrectly presume: which is, crypto as an alternative to day-to-day currency (edit: or perhaps other generally designed-to-be-liquid thing). Which, I agree with most, it will almost certainly NEVER be. But that doesn't exclude the possibility of crypto as long-term investment/hedge against inflation. I wouldn't necessarily argue that "crypto in the future will definitely be a big and useful thing," but I think it's wildly premature to call it dead.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

tim333 3y ago

Daily spot liquidity is ~usd 3 bn. Not sure that's negligible?

quickthrowman 3y ago
~$800M of SPY traded in the closing 1 minute candle today, ~$40B in total. That’s a single ETF. $3B is peanuts compared to real equity and bond markets.
- hnfong 3y ago
  That's a straw-man (or True Scotsman?) argument. You're putting up BTC against the most traded ETF in the world, and claiming that BTC has no liquidity because the volume is just 7% of that? There's nowhere in the world where $3B daily volume can be called "negligible".

eaurouge 3y ago

Here's effectively what you said, edited for information: > Every bit of evidence is that the crypto boom has crashed to Earth ... > Yet somehow BTC is still trading at close to historic highs. > ... if it were remotely a functioning market or were at all "real", it would be trading at a tiny fraction of that amount. The fact that it still holds is the best demonstration of how illusory the whole sham is. Which, as others have interpreted, is to say that the valuation (second sentence) is at odds with your perceived reality (first sentence). Therefore (third sentence) it's a "demonstration of how illusory the whole sham is". Those are your words. You can't just alter reality to make them out to mean something else.

llm_nerd 3y ago
What reality did I alter? Bitcoin's current value is *completely* irrational and absolutely unjustified. When it had some prospective future, sure some tenuous argument could be made, but now it's basically NFTs -- people collecting worthless things, with so little real (not wash) trading that for a while the illusion holds on. That's the sham. In the same way that GameStop or BedBathandBeyond didn't become retail powerhouses because a bunch of WallStreetBets sorts aped it. You seem to be under delusions that a given niche market is demonstrative of much at all. Crypto was the future. Now it's, for all intents and purposes, dead outside of crime, but as long as there are HODL sorts it can keep up the pretend value.
- jrm4 3y ago
  A lot of "real" companies are investing in it; which by definition makes it no better or worse than ANY OTHER SPECULATIVE THING. Basically "that's, just like, your opinion, man."
  - llm_nerd 3y ago
    What real companies? Tesla did at the spurring of Musk, and then quietly dumped all of it. A few other "investment" companies occasionally make some statement that amounts to a pump and dump. >it no better or worse than ANY OTHER SPECULATIVE THING Bunching everything together as "speculative" doesn't somehow make them equal. Buying land is not the same as buying an NFT. Buying shares in a bank is not the same as buying Bitcoin. Bitcoin's entire history has been crime and fraud. It temporarily duped the mainstream, but having conned main street it has returned to its crime roots.