I just wish Matt Damon would have known this, he'd still have both kidneys and a lot of plasma.
Bitcoin - Cryptocurrency
- Thread starter studio1087
- Start date
chris m.
Doctor of Teleocity
El Salvador desperately turning to BC as an alternative currency says more about the lack of confidence and stability of their sovereign currency than it says about BC. The dollar, euro, yen, and pound are in a different league.
Renown
Tele-Meister
Where did the money go? My best guess:
Russia is known for cyberattack , my bank sent me a warning to be on the lookout and they offer insurance that I bookemarked.
What is a bitcion and how do they mine them??? They use massive computers (CRAY ?)that needs massive amounts of electricity. That energy costs more today because of current fuel prices. No?
What I know about a BIT. In computers hexadecimal/binary. One bit in binary is 1 or 0 same as on or off. Four 4bits make a byte and a byte is hexadecimal or base sixteen.
To make a long post short, fuel prices raise bitcoin maintenance cost. Who gains to win besides bitcoin tho
Russia is known for cyberattack , my bank sent me a warning to be on the lookout and they offer insurance that I bookemarked.
What is a bitcion and how do they mine them??? They use massive computers (CRAY ?)that needs massive amounts of electricity. That energy costs more today because of current fuel prices. No?
What I know about a BIT. In computers hexadecimal/binary. One bit in binary is 1 or 0 same as on or off. Four 4bits make a byte and a byte is hexadecimal or base sixteen.
To make a long post short, fuel prices raise bitcoin maintenance cost. Who gains to win besides bitcoin tho
stratology
Tele-Meister
Exactly.
Crypto currencies are highly volatile. But there are also 'traditional' currencies that lose value quickly, like the Turkish Lira.
And circumstances may change. US dollar is, in comparison, very stable, but from what I hear from US media, there unfortunately is a small but realistic chance of civil war in a few years - which would have highly unpredictable consequences for the dollar.
Traditional currencies becoming effectively worthless has quite a few precedents in history.
I do think the underlying original objectives of cryptocurrencies - having a global, peer controlled currency that is not dependent on banks and governments - is a good idea. Especially in cases of local crisis, where a stable global currency could help reduce local hardship.
But there is a significant divide between the original idea, and both the actual real-world use, and the technological implementation. From my personal, subjective perspective - which is also exclusively based on a technology (not finance) point of view - blockchain and the current implementation of cryptocurrencies are not a very promising way to achieve these original goals.
And there is also the divide on the philosophical and human level: one can have an idealised concept of a new global currency and finance, but once you involve actual finance oriented people, whose only goal is personal profit, achieving goals that benefit humanity goes right out of the window and becomes irrelevant.
Last edited:
chris m.
Doctor of Teleocity
I like the concept, but no currency can be stable. As economies and productivity go through booms and busts, actual goods and services and the level of supply and demand will change. Inevitably, actual real fluctuations in the value of real goods in the real world will mean currency values will also fluctuate.
Central banks can do things that help dampen currency fluctuations, up to a point. I don’t see how any global currency that isn’t actively managed by something akin to a central bank would avoid volatility.
stratology
Tele-Meister
And for the part of crypto that is possibly the most relevant for musicians:
The 'divide' between good intentions and awful implementations and outcome can be seen on NFTs as well.
Original concept:
IRL, it's common to have good photographers sell signed prints of their best photos. So you have something that is easily reproducible and mass manufactured - photos - made unique by a signature of the original artist. Which brings a legitimate increase in value for enthusiasts who want to buy a signed print.
The original idea of NFTs was to bring the same concept to digital art.
And, again if fails on both the technological implementation and real world outcome:
Technology:
1. Imagine you want to sell a set of pickups on Reverb. You set a price of $180. Someone offers $160. You want to accept the offer. Now imagine that just clicking the 'accept offer' button triggers a $120 transaction fee that you have to pay to Reverb, which is automatically deducted from the $160 agreed price.
That's what happens when you try to sell an NFT. It's called 'gas fee' on the Ethereum network.
2. Imagine you want to buy something that is advertised as a signed print, you buy it, only to find out that the thing you actually bought is a tiny piece of paper with the artist's signature, nothing else, no actual print.
That's how NFTs currently work - the digital art is not attached to the scrap of digital information that you actually purchase.
3. Imagine you want to sell a piece of your digital art - like the original wav file of a rough mix of a successful track that was released otherwise. To do that, you have to have a clear idea of what it is you're selling, and options to decide - do you want to sell just the file, or do you want to sell the publishing and copyright attached to the art as well.
NFTs, as of now, don't offer any of that, not even minimal clarity and reliability.
Real world:
The original idea, the thing that was happening in the earliest days of NFTs - artists selling digital art - was completely overrun by the finance crowd, who are not artists and sell crap art and stolen art in an attempt to make a quick profit.
Crypto and NFTs can be viewed from both a technology centred perspective, and from a finance centred perspective. Both are equally valid.
And, you can make a reasonable 'good faith' argument, as well as a reasonable 'bad faith' argument. Meaning 'there were good intentions, but it went horribly wrong' vs. 'this was a scam from the start'.
If you come from a tech point of view, it's probably easier to make a 'good faith' argument: 'Dogecoin was a well intended joke implemented by technology enthusiasts.'
If you come from a finance centred point of view, it's probably easier to make a 'bad faith' argument: 'Ethereum is crap technology that was never going to work, and was intended to rip off people from the start. A pyramid scheme. All hype. A scam, like Theranos.'
The 'divide' between good intentions and awful implementations and outcome can be seen on NFTs as well.
Original concept:
IRL, it's common to have good photographers sell signed prints of their best photos. So you have something that is easily reproducible and mass manufactured - photos - made unique by a signature of the original artist. Which brings a legitimate increase in value for enthusiasts who want to buy a signed print.
The original idea of NFTs was to bring the same concept to digital art.
And, again if fails on both the technological implementation and real world outcome:
Technology:
1. Imagine you want to sell a set of pickups on Reverb. You set a price of $180. Someone offers $160. You want to accept the offer. Now imagine that just clicking the 'accept offer' button triggers a $120 transaction fee that you have to pay to Reverb, which is automatically deducted from the $160 agreed price.
That's what happens when you try to sell an NFT. It's called 'gas fee' on the Ethereum network.
2. Imagine you want to buy something that is advertised as a signed print, you buy it, only to find out that the thing you actually bought is a tiny piece of paper with the artist's signature, nothing else, no actual print.
That's how NFTs currently work - the digital art is not attached to the scrap of digital information that you actually purchase.
3. Imagine you want to sell a piece of your digital art - like the original wav file of a rough mix of a successful track that was released otherwise. To do that, you have to have a clear idea of what it is you're selling, and options to decide - do you want to sell just the file, or do you want to sell the publishing and copyright attached to the art as well.
NFTs, as of now, don't offer any of that, not even minimal clarity and reliability.
Real world:
The original idea, the thing that was happening in the earliest days of NFTs - artists selling digital art - was completely overrun by the finance crowd, who are not artists and sell crap art and stolen art in an attempt to make a quick profit.
Crypto and NFTs can be viewed from both a technology centred perspective, and from a finance centred perspective. Both are equally valid.
And, you can make a reasonable 'good faith' argument, as well as a reasonable 'bad faith' argument. Meaning 'there were good intentions, but it went horribly wrong' vs. 'this was a scam from the start'.
If you come from a tech point of view, it's probably easier to make a 'good faith' argument: 'Dogecoin was a well intended joke implemented by technology enthusiasts.'
If you come from a finance centred point of view, it's probably easier to make a 'bad faith' argument: 'Ethereum is crap technology that was never going to work, and was intended to rip off people from the start. A pyramid scheme. All hype. A scam, like Theranos.'
Last edited:
I'm kind of waiting to hear the Terry Downs of soldering or the Buckocaster of sparkle or Jack Wells of woodshop on crypto before beginning my partscaster of cash. So, far, I haven't heard it.
Synchro
Tele-Holic
In the next room, in the bottom of a ceramic cup, among buttons, paperclips and expired ballpoint pens, is a Denarius, minted in the era of Caligula. It is somewhere between 1981 and 1985 years old. It’s dollar value, based upon the current price of silver, is $4.76 as silver, but its numismatic value, the fact that it was minted long ago, would make it worth considerably more in the current market, but at the absolute core, it’s true value of that of 6.81 grams of silver.
Now, here’s where it gets interesting; the name Caligula has become shorthand for corruption and perversion. He is one of the most notorious figures of his era, and in my opinion, unworthy of any honor; then, or now. So, why does a lump of silver, crudely minted with his likeness, go for much more than the same amount of raw silver?
The answer is scarcity. Almost every denarius from that era was long ago melted and used for another purpose. So my Caligula Denarius is worth many more dollars than the silver of which it is comprised.
If a grab a piece of notebook paper and scrawl the words “this is worth a million dollars” it is worth a million dollars, if I can find someone that is willing to pay me a million for it. Or, it’s worth the value of its weight in waste paper. An autograph is valued, based upon the fame of the autographer and the rarity of that person giving out autographs. If I autograph something, it will immediately have the value of waste paper, but if that autograph is verified as a Babe Ruth signature, it’s considerably more valuable.
Value is agreed upon by the buyer and the seller, and is ephemeral. Bitcoin, the US Dollar, an ounce of silver, and ounce of gold or an ounce of platinum are are worth whatever the market states it to be worth, at a given moment. Caveat emptor.
Now, here’s where it gets interesting; the name Caligula has become shorthand for corruption and perversion. He is one of the most notorious figures of his era, and in my opinion, unworthy of any honor; then, or now. So, why does a lump of silver, crudely minted with his likeness, go for much more than the same amount of raw silver?
The answer is scarcity. Almost every denarius from that era was long ago melted and used for another purpose. So my Caligula Denarius is worth many more dollars than the silver of which it is comprised.
If a grab a piece of notebook paper and scrawl the words “this is worth a million dollars” it is worth a million dollars, if I can find someone that is willing to pay me a million for it. Or, it’s worth the value of its weight in waste paper. An autograph is valued, based upon the fame of the autographer and the rarity of that person giving out autographs. If I autograph something, it will immediately have the value of waste paper, but if that autograph is verified as a Babe Ruth signature, it’s considerably more valuable.
Value is agreed upon by the buyer and the seller, and is ephemeral. Bitcoin, the US Dollar, an ounce of silver, and ounce of gold or an ounce of platinum are are worth whatever the market states it to be worth, at a given moment. Caveat emptor.
You bet it is. I want bitcoin produced on tube driven computers, and nothing else.
Sums up my opinions.
Scarcity is a real thing, and the basis of much valuation, but artificial scarcity always fails.
Great point.
Very true. I know a thing or two about encryption, as part of my job, and nothing about bitcoin impressed me.
Where do I sign up?
JJLC
Tele-Holic
about 1 year ago I told some folks on a different forum that the crypto markets were gonna have a HUGE CRASH; everyone there was like yeah, whatever.
Now those same forum members are all caught with their pants down and their wallets are a big bunch lighter because of greed, IMHO. Oh well, crap. Better luck next time.
I can understand people taking risks to invest and/or trade entities that are related to tangible needs for humans be it food related, technology related, manufactured goods, transportation, energy, etc., but to go and play in some Ponzi scheme sand box is an invitation to be a sucker, IMHO.
DYODD .......
Now those same forum members are all caught with their pants down and their wallets are a big bunch lighter because of greed, IMHO. Oh well, crap. Better luck next time.
I can understand people taking risks to invest and/or trade entities that are related to tangible needs for humans be it food related, technology related, manufactured goods, transportation, energy, etc., but to go and play in some Ponzi scheme sand box is an invitation to be a sucker, IMHO.
DYODD .......
stratology
Tele-Meister
The more competent voices in the crypto market actually made similar predictions. That, at that time, we were at the height of a bull market, which will be followed by a bear market. Same patterns that could be observed in the past in the crypto market, as well as other financial markets.
Current predictions, AFAIK, seem to be that the bear market will last maybe till 2024, followed by another bull market.
Disclaimer: this is what I hear from places like the Coinbureau YouTube channel, not my own opinion, or anything that I could personally back up with data...
burntfrijoles
Poster Extraordinaire
Fools Gold. I am not saying it's not viable but it's an immature product and has a long way to go to earn trust and confidence regarding its valuation. The average Jill or Joe doesn't understand it. Blockchains are gibberish to most I'm an idiot so I can't explain it to them.
I came very close to dipping my toe in a Crytpo ETF but got squeamish. So glad I did.
I came very close to dipping my toe in a Crytpo ETF but got squeamish. So glad I did.
sixstringbastard
Friend of Leo's
I believe PT Barnum already summed this up perfectly.
stratology
Tele-Meister
They are just databases, where you can only add, never delete records.
Imagine something like your Contacts app. You have a contact entry, with fields for the person's first name, last name, street, town, date of birth etc.
Now imagine you accidentally enter the wrong date of birth for a person. On a blockchain, you can not fix or delete that wrong entry. You can only add a new date of birth, with the old one still there.
This is a simplified, but correct, explanation. If you want to dig deeper into further details, like distributed ledger, here's the Wiki entry.
chris m.
Doctor of Teleocity
Those predictions are likely based on past analysis of typical economic cycles and their typical length. However, always remember the warning, "past performance does not guarantee future returns".
As we have seen, EVENTS which we cannot control often have a big impact on the market. Those cycles and patterns can be totally upended by what happens in the world. Here's a few things that can throw a monkey wrench into any predictions:
-- a war
-- a pandemic
-- a big volcano erupts, or there's a massive earthquake somewhere like L.A.
-- an important politician or government gets assassinated/overthrown
-- an important CEO of a big company like Apple or Tesla goes off the rails
-- a big weather disaster, oil spill, or other massive industrial accident causes a major disruption in the supply chain or paralyzes a key financial city like NYC, Tokyo, or London.
-- a large financial firm makes too many risky bets using flawed algorithms developed by quants that are too smart without enough common sense, and then needs a bail-out to prevent a total market meltdown.
-- an oligopoly like OPEC, or any one big player within the fossil fuel supply industry (such as Russia or Saudi Arabia) decides to choke off the supply of fossil fuels.
-- people totally lose confidence and stop spending any money....possibly triggered by one or more of the above.
Unless the CIA actually invented it, eh?
chris m.
Doctor of Teleocity
I would disagree about time. Time explains a lot of things that happen in the real, physical world, such as aging. Or things burning until they run out of fuel. The laws of thermodynamics have time built into them. So does the Big Bang. You can't run the clock backwards except maybe at the end of the universe's expansion when maybe it'll contract to a singularity again.
Time as most people think of it is also much simpler than physics has shown time to be in the universe. For example, in the current general model of physics time and space form space-time and explain where gravity comes from--physical objects "warping" space-time.
Money, on the other hand, is a human cultural artifact. It's just a tool that when working properly makes it much easier to exchange real goods and services. The laws of the physical universe as we understand them function perfectly well without invoking money, or humans.
Time as most people think of it is also much simpler than physics has shown time to be in the universe. For example, in the current general model of physics time and space form space-time and explain where gravity comes from--physical objects "warping" space-time.
Money, on the other hand, is a human cultural artifact. It's just a tool that when working properly makes it much easier to exchange real goods and services. The laws of the physical universe as we understand them function perfectly well without invoking money, or humans.
Last edited:
burntfrijoles
Poster Extraordinaire
Sorry, I misspoke. I understand that it’s a database. I simply don’t it’s role or value in the value of cryptocurrency. As I said, “I’m an idiot”.
What do y'all think about Pi coin? Anyone can mine on a phone or computer and it isn't energy intensive.
Of course it doesn't have any value yet(I think when they hit a billion users is when it will, but I may be wrong on that number), but I like that it seems more accessible to everyone and isn't incredibly polluting.
Of course it doesn't have any value yet(I think when they hit a billion users is when it will, but I may be wrong on that number), but I like that it seems more accessible to everyone and isn't incredibly polluting.
stratology
Tele-Meister
Looked into it, a little, after your post, out of curiosity.
Lots of red flags right away, one obvious one being their privacy policy, available here.
You join their network, you do not mine a token that has any value, but you do provide the company with lots of your private data, which is used for targeted advertising.
Similar threads
- Locked
