3 ms·

When everybody agrees about something in finance, it's typically the other way around. Reminds me of the "everybody knows Tether doesn't have the dollars it cl

When everybody agrees about something in finance, it's typically the other way around. Reminds me of the "everybody knows Tether doesn't have the dollars it claims and it's collapse is imminent" that was parroted here for years.

GenerWork 1y ago
People here are still in denial that crypto will ever have a use case, meanwhile you have Larry Fink saying that he wants to tokenize the financial ecosystem.
- AaronAPU 1y ago
  Number go up isn’t a use case. This seems to be the disconnect.
  - sph 1y ago
    > Number go up isn’t a use case. Ever heard of gold or real estate? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Store_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Store_of_value
- Yizahi 1y ago
  Token do have use case, obviously. Like, we can see countless usecases with our own eyes. Tokens don't have any legal and at the same time competitive use case, that was the argument. All of those castle in sky constructs about how there would be property deeds on blockchain (technically and legally impossible), how there there would be game assets on blockchain (also technically impossible plus no game studio would ever be interested), how ticket scalpers would solved on blockchain (technically possible, but no ticket vendor is interested because they are the ones who benefit from scalpers) etc. And the list goes on. All of those legal use cases were a dud, because it is simply a shitty technology. But to reiterate, there is great and massive actual use case for the tokens, yes. No one would argue against it :) . We just think that it is bad.
- singularity2001 1y ago
  People are in denial that crypto (at least the current iteration) can go to completely zero which is impossible for AI tech
bdangubic 1y ago
every penny I made in the market over the last 30 years can be in some (or all) way attributed to exactly this. but this has to be backed by fundamentals. and fundamentals are weakening… this is a good read on OpenAI shit happening recently but it is industry-wide related - https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai400bn/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai400bn/
grogers 1y ago
The argument about Tether wasn't that they didn't have any assets backing the coins. It was that the assets they had were more risky than the boring <1 mo maturity treasuries they should be holding. Just because tether didn't implode , doesn't mean it wasn't a very real possibility. It's not very different from "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"
Yizahi 1y ago
And they did not in fact had dollars to back them up. They did not had them for a few years continuously. The lesson is, you never bet even on a surefire stake if there is market corruption involved. Or if mafia money involved. In case of Tether it was both. It was a good lesson for me personally, to always check wider picture and consider unknown factors.

GenerWork 1y ago

People here are still in denial that crypto will ever have a use case, meanwhile you have Larry Fink saying that he wants to tokenize the financial ecosystem.

AaronAPU 1y ago
Number go up isn’t a use case. This seems to be the disconnect.
- sph 1y ago
  > Number go up isn’t a use case. Ever heard of gold or real estate? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Store_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Store_of_value
Yizahi 1y ago
Token do have use case, obviously. Like, we can see countless usecases with our own eyes. Tokens don't have any legal and at the same time competitive use case, that was the argument. All of those castle in sky constructs about how there would be property deeds on blockchain (technically and legally impossible), how there there would be game assets on blockchain (also technically impossible plus no game studio would ever be interested), how ticket scalpers would solved on blockchain (technically possible, but no ticket vendor is interested because they are the ones who benefit from scalpers) etc. And the list goes on. All of those legal use cases were a dud, because it is simply a shitty technology. But to reiterate, there is great and massive actual use case for the tokens, yes. No one would argue against it :) . We just think that it is bad.
singularity2001 1y ago
People are in denial that crypto (at least the current iteration) can go to completely zero which is impossible for AI tech

bdangubic 1y ago

every penny I made in the market over the last 30 years can be in some (or all) way attributed to exactly this. but this has to be backed by fundamentals. and fundamentals are weakening… this is a good read on OpenAI shit happening recently but it is industry-wide related - https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai400bn/ https://www.wheresyoured.at/openai400bn/

grogers 1y ago

The argument about Tether wasn't that they didn't have any assets backing the coins. It was that the assets they had were more risky than the boring <1 mo maturity treasuries they should be holding. Just because tether didn't implode , doesn't mean it wasn't a very real possibility. It's not very different from "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"

Yizahi 1y ago

And they did not in fact had dollars to back them up. They did not had them for a few years continuously. The lesson is, you never bet even on a surefire stake if there is market corruption involved. Or if mafia money involved. In case of Tether it was both. It was a good lesson for me personally, to always check wider picture and consider unknown factors.