I don’t think I’m self-righteous when I say that the use cases for crypto just aren’t there yet as they require a non-speculative environment to be viable.
I like the idea of smart contracts and general ledger. It’s useful for buying things in theory. But at $10+ for a transaction fee that’s impossible. I’ve been waiting over 10 years.
I think this is pragmatic. And I don’t think it’s self-righteous to roll my eyes when some crypto fan tells me to just wait. Especially if they are financially bound up in convincing people to raise the price of crypto.
I do care where people spend money as it affects me and people I love. Lotto is bad. Spending lots of money on lotto is bad.
“Betting” on crypto is driving up the price and crowding out real use cases.
Also, ethically, pump and dump schemes are bad. I feel bad that victims lose money. I want these schemes to stop. I’m not self-righteous in my anger. I don’t care that much, I just want the SEC to investigate and prosecute.
Algorand transaction fees are a fraction of a cent.
Additionally, that betting has cascading effects of GPU markets, and uses a small nation's worth of electricity every year. If that bet was contained only to the participants, then it's fine. But it's not.
Definitely zero issues with shit like that in the past, that’s for sure.
"You're burning the world!"
"We are saving the world!"
Both are obviously BS.
Unless I made an error here, or that study is flawed this seems to me like a ridiculously huge amount?
The following excerpt is a point that many seem to miss.
> In fact, investors won’t — on average — be able to cash out for even as much as they put in. Much of that money went to cryptocurrency mining. Recent analysis shows that around $25 billion and growing has already gone to Bitcoin miners, who, by best estimates, are now spending $1 billion just on electricity every month, possibly more.
> That money is gone forever, having been converted to carbon and released into the atmosphere — making cryptocurrencies even worse than traditional Ponzi schemes. Most of the money lost in Bernie Madoff’s infamous Ponzi was eventually clawed back and returned to investors. Much of the money put into cryptocurrency, even if courts could trace back tangled webs of semi-anonymous cryptocurrency transactions, can never be recuperated.
If you're being sold Bitcoin or any other crypto as an "investment" where you might receive a "return", you're participating in a Ponzi scam.
If you're buying crypto so that you can use it to make a payment (e.g. Lightning payment to your favourite podcaster, or buying a pizza), then ok carry on.
I mean, crypto is sorta garbage, but so are all the fiat currencies. Orthodox economics apparently says it's totally cool to print money to support ditch-digging because it makes jobs reports look good. The US Fed itself acknowledges in its own reports that the US is financially unsustainable. Does anyone see how this doesn't just collapse sometime in the next 50 years?
Unless we start a big war with China...
Why?
A stock is a predicted stream of future earnings. A Ponzi scheme produces nothing and only survives through new investment. Stocks don’t need future investment as they can just pay out dividends forever based on the companies earnings.
Equating these two things seems fraudulent at worst and stupid at best.
I am just so bored with reading about anything to do with the entire space, pro or con.
An inescapable argument about basically nothing. How do I opt out completely?
Even if it is 'irrational' as described by some behavioral economists, how can we accept that the behavioral economist who is accusing the consumer of irrationality is himself entirely rational.
The premise is nonsensical in my view. Differing actors employ their individual agency towards unique ends which cannot be evaluated from a position of imperfect information. Value is subjective.
This is unfortunate, because we've seen real Ponzi schemes that use crypto (Bitconnect, PlusToken, Onecoin) and it makes it harder to talk about them when "Ponzi scheme" gets so watered down.
Which makes it harder to describe frauds like the one Charles Ponzi perpetrated but oh well.
