4 ms·

The only buyers are criminals, sanction evaders, and probably the dumbest people in the world given that the entire crypto ecosystem is focused on one thing and

The only buyers are criminals, sanction evaders, and probably the dumbest people in the world given that the entire crypto ecosystem is focused on one thing and one thing only. Creating the most deflationary monetary system in history.

zombot 11mo ago
And also the most unerasable, and hence traceable, system. You can't delete records from a blockchain.
HighGoldstein 11mo ago
There are a lot of places in the world where crypto payments are now prevalent, not because users are the "dumbest people in the world" but because they have no better alternative for electronic finance. Either conventional banking is nonexistent/abysmal for this purpose or their national currencies are in such bad condition that it's better for them to hold and use cryptocurrencies.
- ForHackernews 11mo ago
  Name one, and provide evidence to support that assertion.
  - HighGoldstein 11mo ago
    Nigeria, Argentina, Venezuela, all prime examples because they faced especially severe problems with hyperinflation and traditional banking. You can also find widespread use in developing economies like Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, but of course to a lesser degree since the problems with traditional finance are not as severe there. I will gladly provide more in-depth information, if someone provides some evidence to support that crypto users are the dumbest people on Earth. If not, feel free to use your own time instead of mine for your education.
    - ForHackernews 11mo ago
      You've mentioned some places in the world that have economic problems. You've provided zero evidence to support the idea that "crypto payments are now prevalent" in any of those places. As a counterexample, El Salvador adopted bitcoin as an official currency, provided state-subsidized infrastructure for citizens to adopt it, and still achieved only minimal usage: > The October 2022 “Encuesta Dinámica Empresarial” from FUSADES registered that 97¾ percent of business have not made even one sale in Bitcoin. NBER and Chamber of Commerce and Industry surveys show similar results. https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/002/2025/068/article-A001-en.xml https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/002/2025/068/arti...
      - rrdharan 11mo ago
        I’m shocked it’s even that high
    - FabHK 11mo ago
      Crypto is not prevalent in the Philippines or Indonesia. Except maybe in the scam centres in the Philippines run by Chinese gangsters that are operating pig butchering and other scams, and threatening to undermine the Philippine government. See The Economist, which estimates that these crypto scammers rake in some $500bn a year. https://www.economist.com/audio/podcasts/scam-inc https://www.economist.com/audio/podcasts/scam-inc https://www.economistgroup.com/press-centre/the-economist/fraud-factories-cyber-criminals-and-corruption-the-economists-new-podcast-scam-inc https://www.economistgroup.com/press-centre/the-economist/fr...
SirMaster 11mo ago
So it was dumb of me to buy my bitcoins back when they were less than $100 a coin just in the slim chance that it completely blew up? I don't see what was dumb about a decision to put less than $1000 into 10 coins just in case. Worked out really well for me in the end and a less than $1000 gamble doesn't seem like that crazy of a gamble, at least to me.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- greekrich92 11mo ago
  That wasn't dumb but thinking this a meaningful rebuttal is
- seanhunter 11mo ago
  You can't evaluate a decision in a stochastic process based on a single outcome, you need to look at the expectation over all outcomes.
- cryptonym 11mo ago
  You basically just confirmed that, from beginning, it's just gambling. Being lucky on your bet doesn't make it a wise investment. I wouldn't call you dumb. I don't know how gamblers feel about their moves.
  - SirMaster 11mo ago
    And the stock market isn't gambling? I view it as such. Was this more or less risky than buying $1000 in scratch offs, or lottery tickets, or spending $1000 in Vegas? In my opinion, crypto when I bought it had a lot more "potential" than any of those more "traditional" forms of gambling which is why I was willing to give it a try with a sum of less than 1% of my yearly income... I am not saying it was a smart choice, just that I don't think it was a particularly stupid choice.
    - cryptonym 11mo ago
lxgr 11mo ago
The entire crypto ecosystem is hardly all about deflation these days. If anything, I'd argue the opposite. Stablecoins, yield, perpetual futures etc. are hardly what Satoshi had in mind.
orbital-decay 11mo ago
>criminals, sanction evaders The definition of both may vary depending on where you are. Being not controlled by governments is the original purpose of cryptocurrencies.
- DonHopkins 11mo ago
  Be honest, don't whitewash. You mean perpetrating fraud and crimes and laundering illegal money is the original purpose of cryptocurrencies.
  - orbital-decay 11mo ago
    I'm living in a reality very different from yours, I don't think you can understand. In my country, actual journalism and speaking about certain things are crimes that will put you into the jail for the rest of your life, get you tortured and likely murdered. Access to the knowledge about certain things is blocked. To be able to do journalism or to circumvent the censorship, one essentially has to commit crimes in another (supposedly free) country as well, because there it's considered to be sanctions evading and/or illegal money laundering. So yeah, of course you can frame it in your way and that would be valid. That was the original ideal of cryptocurrencies - to have a financial system not controlled by the governments. Of course it can be used for fraud and other things we probably both consider bad, by design. Just like gold.

zombot 11mo ago

And also the most unerasable, and hence traceable, system. You can't delete records from a blockchain.

HighGoldstein 11mo ago

There are a lot of places in the world where crypto payments are now prevalent, not because users are the "dumbest people in the world" but because they have no better alternative for electronic finance. Either conventional banking is nonexistent/abysmal for this purpose or their national currencies are in such bad condition that it's better for them to hold and use cryptocurrencies.

ForHackernews 11mo ago
Name one, and provide evidence to support that assertion.
- HighGoldstein 11mo ago
  Nigeria, Argentina, Venezuela, all prime examples because they faced especially severe problems with hyperinflation and traditional banking. You can also find widespread use in developing economies like Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, but of course to a lesser degree since the problems with traditional finance are not as severe there. I will gladly provide more in-depth information, if someone provides some evidence to support that crypto users are the dumbest people on Earth. If not, feel free to use your own time instead of mine for your education.
  - ForHackernews 11mo ago
    You've mentioned some places in the world that have economic problems. You've provided zero evidence to support the idea that "crypto payments are now prevalent" in any of those places. As a counterexample, El Salvador adopted bitcoin as an official currency, provided state-subsidized infrastructure for citizens to adopt it, and still achieved only minimal usage: > The October 2022 “Encuesta Dinámica Empresarial” from FUSADES registered that 97¾ percent of business have not made even one sale in Bitcoin. NBER and Chamber of Commerce and Industry surveys show similar results. https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/002/2025/068/article-A001-en.xml https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/002/2025/068/arti...
    - rrdharan 11mo ago
      I’m shocked it’s even that high
  - FabHK 11mo ago
    Crypto is not prevalent in the Philippines or Indonesia. Except maybe in the scam centres in the Philippines run by Chinese gangsters that are operating pig butchering and other scams, and threatening to undermine the Philippine government. See The Economist, which estimates that these crypto scammers rake in some $500bn a year. https://www.economist.com/audio/podcasts/scam-inc https://www.economist.com/audio/podcasts/scam-inc https://www.economistgroup.com/press-centre/the-economist/fraud-factories-cyber-criminals-and-corruption-the-economists-new-podcast-scam-inc https://www.economistgroup.com/press-centre/the-economist/fr...

SirMaster 11mo ago

So it was dumb of me to buy my bitcoins back when they were less than $100 a coin just in the slim chance that it completely blew up? I don't see what was dumb about a decision to put less than $1000 into 10 coins just in case. Worked out really well for me in the end and a less than $1000 gamble doesn't seem like that crazy of a gamble, at least to me.

deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
greekrich92 11mo ago
That wasn't dumb but thinking this a meaningful rebuttal is
seanhunter 11mo ago
You can't evaluate a decision in a stochastic process based on a single outcome, you need to look at the expectation over all outcomes.
cryptonym 11mo ago
You basically just confirmed that, from beginning, it's just gambling. Being lucky on your bet doesn't make it a wise investment. I wouldn't call you dumb. I don't know how gamblers feel about their moves.
- SirMaster 11mo ago
  And the stock market isn't gambling? I view it as such. Was this more or less risky than buying $1000 in scratch offs, or lottery tickets, or spending $1000 in Vegas? In my opinion, crypto when I bought it had a lot more "potential" than any of those more "traditional" forms of gambling which is why I was willing to give it a try with a sum of less than 1% of my yearly income... I am not saying it was a smart choice, just that I don't think it was a particularly stupid choice.
  - cryptonym 11mo ago

lxgr 11mo ago

The entire crypto ecosystem is hardly all about deflation these days. If anything, I'd argue the opposite. Stablecoins, yield, perpetual futures etc. are hardly what Satoshi had in mind.

orbital-decay 11mo ago

>criminals, sanction evaders The definition of both may vary depending on where you are. Being not controlled by governments is the original purpose of cryptocurrencies.

DonHopkins 11mo ago
Be honest, don't whitewash. You mean perpetrating fraud and crimes and laundering illegal money is the original purpose of cryptocurrencies.
- orbital-decay 11mo ago
  I'm living in a reality very different from yours, I don't think you can understand. In my country, actual journalism and speaking about certain things are crimes that will put you into the jail for the rest of your life, get you tortured and likely murdered. Access to the knowledge about certain things is blocked. To be able to do journalism or to circumvent the censorship, one essentially has to commit crimes in another (supposedly free) country as well, because there it's considered to be sanctions evading and/or illegal money laundering. So yeah, of course you can frame it in your way and that would be valid. That was the original ideal of cryptocurrencies - to have a financial system not controlled by the governments. Of course it can be used for fraud and other things we probably both consider bad, by design. Just like gold.