6 ms·

Bitcoin is at 93k so I don’t think it’s entirely accurate to say blockchain is insubstantive or without value

airstrike 10mo ago
If you can't point to real use cases at scale, it's hard to argue it has intrisinc value even though it may have speculative value.
rpcope1 10mo ago
There can be a bunch of crazy people trading each other various lumps of dog feces for increasing sums of cash, that doesn't mean dogshit is particularly valuable or substantive either.
- triceratops 10mo ago
  I'd argue even dogshit has more practical use than Bitcoin, if no one paid money for Bitcoin. You can throw it for self-defence, compost it (under high heat to kill the germs), put it on your property to scare away raccoons (it works sometimes).
  - FrancisMoodie 10mo ago
    Bitcoin and other crypto coins have a practical use. You can use them to buy whatever is being sold on the darkweb with the main product categories being drugs and guns. I honestly believe much of the valuation of Crypto is tied to these marketplaces.
    - nutjob2 10mo ago
      Don't forget scamming people out of billions of dollars of their hard earned life savings.
- sodafountan 10mo ago
  And by "dog feces," I assume you mean fiat currency, correct? Cryptocurrency solves the money-printing problem we've had around the world since we left the gold standard. If governments stopped making their currencies worthless, then bitcoin would go to zero.
ejoso 10mo ago
Uh… So the argument here is that anticipated future value == meaningful value today? The whole cryptocurrency world requires evangelical buy-in. But there is no directly created functional value other than a historic record of transactions and hypothetical decentralization. It doesn’t directly create value. It’s a store of it - again, assuming enough people continue to buy into the narrative so that it doesn’t dramatically deflate when you need to recover your assets. States and other investors are helping make stability happen to maintain it as a value store, but you require the story propagating to achieve those ends.
mgaunard 10mo ago
very little of the trading actually happens on the blockchain, it's only used to move assets between trading venues. The values of bitcoin are: - easy access to trading for everyone, without institutional or national barriers - high leverage to effectively easily borrow a lot of money to trade with - new derivative products that streamline the process and make speculation easier than ever The blockchain plays very little part in this. If anything it makes borrowing harder.
- blibble 10mo ago
  I agree with "easy access to trading for everyone, without institutional or national barriers" how on earth does bitcoin have anything to do with borrowing or derivatives? in a way that wouldn't also work for beanie babies
  - mgaunard 10mo ago
    Those are the main innovations tied to crypto trading. They do indeed have little to do with the blockchain or bitcoin itself, and do apply to any asset. There are actually several startups whose pitch is to bring back those innovations to equities (note that this is different from tokenized equities).
senordevnyc 10mo ago
You’re wasting your breath. Bitcoin will be at a million in 2050 and you’ll still get downvoted here for suggesting it’s anything other than a stupid bubble that’s about to burst any day now.
- binary132 10mo ago
  It’s hard to understand how people can be so determined to ignore reality.
- nutjob2 10mo ago
  Quite the opposite, if you need to defend a technical idea with its price in the in a largely speculative market, you've already lost the argument. That people are greedy and ignorant and bid up BTC doesn't prove anything about its value.
skybrian 10mo ago
This seems to be almost purely bandwagon value, like preferring Coca-Cola to some other drink. There are other blockchains that are better technically along a bunch of dimensions, but they don't have the mindshare. Bitcoin is probably unkillable. Even if were to crash, it won't be hard to round up enough true believers to boost it up again. But it's technically stagnant.
- OvidNaso 10mo ago
  True, but then so is a lot of "tech". There were certainly, at least equivalent, social applications before and all throughout Facebooks dominance, but like Bitcoin the network effect becomes primary, after a minimum feature set.
  - skybrian 10mo ago
    For Bitcoin, it doesn't exactly seem to be a network effect? It's not like choosing a chat app because that's what your friends use. Many other cryptocurrencies are popular enough to be easily tradable and have features to make them work better for trade. Also, you can speculate on different cryptocurrencies than your friends do.
- sodafountan 10mo ago
  Technically stagnant is a good thing; I'd prefer the term technically mature. It's accomplished what it set out to do, which is to be a decentralized, anonymous form of digital currency. The only thing that MIGHT kill it is if governments stopped printing money.
venturecruelty 10mo ago
Beanie Babies were trading pretty well, too, although it wasn't quite "solving sudokus for drugs", so I guess that's why they didn't have as much staying power.
adastra22 10mo ago
With almost zero fundamentals. That’s the part you are glossing over.

If you can't point to real use cases at scale, it's hard to argue it has intrisinc value even though it may have speculative value.

rpcope1 10mo ago

There can be a bunch of crazy people trading each other various lumps of dog feces for increasing sums of cash, that doesn't mean dogshit is particularly valuable or substantive either.

triceratops 10mo ago
I'd argue even dogshit has more practical use than Bitcoin, if no one paid money for Bitcoin. You can throw it for self-defence, compost it (under high heat to kill the germs), put it on your property to scare away raccoons (it works sometimes).
- FrancisMoodie 10mo ago
  Bitcoin and other crypto coins have a practical use. You can use them to buy whatever is being sold on the darkweb with the main product categories being drugs and guns. I honestly believe much of the valuation of Crypto is tied to these marketplaces.
  - nutjob2 10mo ago
    Don't forget scamming people out of billions of dollars of their hard earned life savings.
sodafountan 10mo ago
And by "dog feces," I assume you mean fiat currency, correct? Cryptocurrency solves the money-printing problem we've had around the world since we left the gold standard. If governments stopped making their currencies worthless, then bitcoin would go to zero.

ejoso 10mo ago

Uh… So the argument here is that anticipated future value == meaningful value today? The whole cryptocurrency world requires evangelical buy-in. But there is no directly created functional value other than a historic record of transactions and hypothetical decentralization. It doesn’t directly create value. It’s a store of it - again, assuming enough people continue to buy into the narrative so that it doesn’t dramatically deflate when you need to recover your assets. States and other investors are helping make stability happen to maintain it as a value store, but you require the story propagating to achieve those ends.

mgaunard 10mo ago

very little of the trading actually happens on the blockchain, it's only used to move assets between trading venues. The values of bitcoin are: - easy access to trading for everyone, without institutional or national barriers - high leverage to effectively easily borrow a lot of money to trade with - new derivative products that streamline the process and make speculation easier than ever The blockchain plays very little part in this. If anything it makes borrowing harder.

blibble 10mo ago
I agree with "easy access to trading for everyone, without institutional or national barriers" how on earth does bitcoin have anything to do with borrowing or derivatives? in a way that wouldn't also work for beanie babies
- mgaunard 10mo ago
  Those are the main innovations tied to crypto trading. They do indeed have little to do with the blockchain or bitcoin itself, and do apply to any asset. There are actually several startups whose pitch is to bring back those innovations to equities (note that this is different from tokenized equities).

senordevnyc 10mo ago

You’re wasting your breath. Bitcoin will be at a million in 2050 and you’ll still get downvoted here for suggesting it’s anything other than a stupid bubble that’s about to burst any day now.

binary132 10mo ago
It’s hard to understand how people can be so determined to ignore reality.
nutjob2 10mo ago
Quite the opposite, if you need to defend a technical idea with its price in the in a largely speculative market, you've already lost the argument. That people are greedy and ignorant and bid up BTC doesn't prove anything about its value.

skybrian 10mo ago

This seems to be almost purely bandwagon value, like preferring Coca-Cola to some other drink. There are other blockchains that are better technically along a bunch of dimensions, but they don't have the mindshare. Bitcoin is probably unkillable. Even if were to crash, it won't be hard to round up enough true believers to boost it up again. But it's technically stagnant.

OvidNaso 10mo ago
True, but then so is a lot of "tech". There were certainly, at least equivalent, social applications before and all throughout Facebooks dominance, but like Bitcoin the network effect becomes primary, after a minimum feature set.
- skybrian 10mo ago
  For Bitcoin, it doesn't exactly seem to be a network effect? It's not like choosing a chat app because that's what your friends use. Many other cryptocurrencies are popular enough to be easily tradable and have features to make them work better for trade. Also, you can speculate on different cryptocurrencies than your friends do.
sodafountan 10mo ago
Technically stagnant is a good thing; I'd prefer the term technically mature. It's accomplished what it set out to do, which is to be a decentralized, anonymous form of digital currency. The only thing that MIGHT kill it is if governments stopped printing money.

venturecruelty 10mo ago

Beanie Babies were trading pretty well, too, although it wasn't quite "solving sudokus for drugs", so I guess that's why they didn't have as much staying power.

adastra22 10mo ago

With almost zero fundamentals. That’s the part you are glossing over.