When I say 'fraud' I don't mean juicing the numbers or asking forgiveness instead or permission. I'm not talking about things that will receive a slap on the wrist or a fine from a regulator. There is a great deal of organized crime that is the backbone of the industry. A lot of people will deserve to go to prison when the music stops.
- Greed. Its absurdly easy to make a ton of money very fast in crypto. As long as that's possible, money will keep pouring into the system.
- Gambling. The global gambling industry is half a trillion every year. Even if you think crypto has no fundamentals and is akin to gambling, it still represents a massive market. Opening a 50x long on a random shitcoin might be the same as yoloing in $10,000 at the roulette table. If the latter can happen sustainably, the former can as well.
- Principles. Crypto/web3/blockchain - whatever you might call it - will continue to attract people at the edge cases simply because of the principles and narratives behind it. Self-sovreignity, privacy, ownership - these are ideas worth pursuing.
If "web2" hadn't shut off its own users from any semblance of ownership in the platforms, or had done more for privacy, web3 would have died in 2017. But because they didn't, web3 will continue to find users simply because of the "privacy + self-ownership" narrative.
More than anything else, I see the massive amounts of money flowing into web3 as a failure of the web2 platforms. If Facebook wasn't such a scummy company, and if Google wasn't tracking everything I do so maliciously, I would have completely ignored web3 as an idea.
This was an easy-money phenomenon. We have another rates announcement today. I expect crypto to respond like the clockwork leveraged risk asset it models.
> global gambling industry is half a trillion every year
This is a good analogy. It’s one I hear in legislative and regulatory halls in the U.S. and Europe, the money centres crypto depends on for its legal demand.
The VCs largely have downside protection. Retail with get screwed but it’s a risk asset; they always get screwed late cycle and we have resolution mechanisms for that. Crypto company employees, however, stand to be boned.
It’s unclear where the legal risk winds up. My bet is the first layer that has not been talking to lawyers so far. That includes dumb executives and naïve employees working for savvy ones.
I'm not going to be crying any tears for them. If you got into this from a business perspective you have zero excuse for pretending that you are not also partially to blame for the outcome. They'll be lucky if they avoid jail time in some cases.
“Announcement effects appear somewhat ambiguous for the [British] stock market” [1].
For the last year, it’s largely been high P/E tech stocks that have reacted viciously to rates announcements. The rest of the market is less sensitive to small changes in rates (jargon: duration). And/or it’s better at pricing it in ex ante.
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S10575...
At least right now mainly be doing something illegal e.g. scamming, rug pulling, insider trading.
SEC and other regulators may be late to the party but are starting to put people in jail for this fast and easy money.
You need to fight your biases.
Honestly nobody cares about these things. This is just a narrative that was grafted onto Web3 after the fact.
In fact most of the devs I know that started pre-2017 deeply care about these things. Many were around in the OWS groups back in the day, they transformed via bitcoin and now mostly work on eth projects. The cool thing is most of those people who were in it for political reason (rather than the newer investors looking to make quick money, and new devs looking for decent paid job) have made enough money to spend the rest of their lives working on this stuff regardless of it making them any richer.
I think we can outwork and outlast the cynics and keep building the things we think are cool. they hype will come and go, the fraudsters will sweep in during mania and con people regardless of our warnings, the authoritarians will try get the state to make it illegal, the google employees will keep complaining that its not innovative. we'll keep on working towards what we think is right.
It's been 13 years and 0 use cases better solved by crypto than any classical system.
But by all means, I'm sure OP will deliver - let's just wait.
Sure it is probably not even 1% of projects by number and there are plenty of frauds/scams (which are oviously illegal without any new laws) and even more just really terrible ideas (whatever happened to caveat emptor?), but there absolutely is a sizeable core of projects, founders, devs, and researchers that cares deeply about privacy, freedom from coprorate/government surveillance and control, open source and open protocols, and building a very different online, digital future than the one we are currently headed for.
I think that's worth the effort. Even if that might fail, and even with the collateral damage from scams and fraud (which, again, are already illegal). We accepted cars despite the deaths and injuries and pollution (which we also deal with legally and try to minimise without destroying the benefits of having cars), and they reshaped our society. I expect crypto and privacy tech. to do the same in time. It may even take as long.
The builders do
If you’re in the tech field and aren’t worried about privacy, the. I don’t even know what to tell you.
What are you talking about?
The blockchain design makes it even easier to mine peoples’ activity and prevents retroactive privacy improvements but, more importantly, the underlying problem is that people like not spending money. Various people have tried micropayments on the web but ads have less friction and don’t bother a sufficiently large group of people enough to pay more than advertisers, not to mention the precedent suggesting that sites will display ads to even paying customers.
Similarly, content hosting has the same failed promise. Blockchains are too inefficient to store the content, which is why all of the “web3” services are so commonly dependent on normal web companies. NFT pirates trying to steal artists’ work are routinely halted by takedown requests to Google, AWS, etc. There are services like IPFS which try to provide less centralized hosting but they’re expensive and have the same issues with most of the actual hosting being on ISPs who are legally required to honor things like DMCA or other illegal content requests.
You're describing DRM. It doesn't exist for blockchain either - famously I can copy/paste NFTs all day long. And it's not clear whether most NFTs even provide any copyrights for the content they link to so you still don't even "own" the content in the legal sense.
Not at all. It's easy for one person to make a lot of money _at the expense of another_. It's a less than zero sum game, though, so each net transaction _cost_ people money todal.
> Self-sovreignity, privacy, ownership - these are ideas worth pursuing.
The ability to evade government regulations and scrutiny is crime.
The underlying idea is that you don't like the laws on financial disclosure, so you want to "get around" them.
As an honest citizen, I see the desire to evade the securities laws as literally criminal intent, which it legally is.
