Cryptocurrency is akin to ‘Ponzi scheme’
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
I think crypto is deplorable purely on the amount of electricity it consumes. It’s pretty clear it offers a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist, unless that problem all along was give a subset of tech people a way to get rich off fools.
I wouldn’t completely dismiss all cryptocurrencies, unless it was Bitcoin being the only one that exists.
Stablecoins are for those that cannot let go of the traditional system. They will all go to zero.
Best part is, its extreme volatile pricing makes it pointless as a 'currency' and completely useless for merchants accepting payments, but perfect as a ponzi scheme. Why do you think not only Stripe has dropped it for payments, but now its somehow 'A store of value' instead of it being an electronic cash system?
Therefore 'Bitcoin' (and its blockchain) has failed in each category except for being a Ponzi scheme and is more pointless than the majority of the other blockchains and coins.
> Stablecoins are for those that cannot let go of the traditional system. They will all go to zero.
I hear that the banks and the payment processors are shaking in their boots over how better Bitcoin is against the 'traditional system' other than for speculation or ponzi schemes. /s
Let’s see what happens next.
Exactly. The banks are rubbish at this. It's obvious to see how a proper stablecoin being used for the same purpose in Canada, or any other country. After all, it isn't affected by Bitcoin's volatile price in any way which that is also my point.
> Let’s see what happens next.
I'll tell you what happens next: Bitcoin being likely to lose its value once again due to its extremely volatile nature.
Sure, it may go up briefly too but in every scenario (including the Bitcoin donations), they will always want to cash it out to USD (or even a proper stablecoin) rather than 'hold it' or use it as a currency.
It’s like watching someone rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship. We have life rafts here, you just need to take one of these orange pills.
I've already taken the orange pill years ago but sold some at >$60k.
It makes even more sense to sell it to (USD, USDC) and buy back in lower.
If they can consume less electricity than "normal" banking, then they aren't a wast of energy.
Bitcoin Lightning will replace SWIFT simple math tells you that, it's never going to zero.
All fiat, stablecoins, eth, “crypto” etc will go to zero.
So it is not clear at all, in fact the only thing clear is that you have never used cryptocurrency.
NFTs are kind of more like a big dog turd in the middle of the sidewalk that you could step in, there's really more of a joy in missing out rather than a fear of missing out, for most normal people.
"How does this argument about BTC[1] apply to gold?"
Eg is gold a ponzi scheme? "Dug up, refined, buried again somewhere like fort knox with a very small use other than as a store of value. (eg some electronics). Whether you decide yes it's ponzi or no it's not, then look at what other difference there is or isn't between gold and btc to justify the conclusion if that conclusion differs.
Or maybe like me you still haven't reached any conclusion about crypto-currencies beyond noting there are a lot of hucksters out there - just like in any goldrush.
[1] yes you can use some other cryptocurrency as your example and some other precious metal or stone such as diamonds or whatever if that is more useful to your thinking.
It is completely different.
Gold is useful. For electronics. For filling teeth. For industrial uses. This is why gold is valuable.
Gold also has properties that make it a good store of value and good currency. It is durable, portable, uniform, and divisible. That is why people "buried again somewhere like fort knox"..."as a store of value". Any commodity with these properties is treated in the same way (mostly other precious metals).
If there is use value and exchange value, gold has both. Bitcoin currently has exchange value but it has no real use value. So they are not the same.
If you are going to donate coins to the cause, who am I to complain?
The average person will do it enough times until they learn, or they will pay someone else to handle it. I am sad when people lose their coin, I would prefer it not to be lost.
That's exactly what crypto is too though isn't it?
It pretty much fills that niche completely. You don't need any more of them. Bitcoin could displace gold in that niche, except that there's no reason to pick that one over all of the others. The thing with gold is that its amount is really fixed, while cryptocurrencies magic themselves into existence every day.
Even gold doesn't really fulfill that job any more. It's been displaced by fiat currencies whose "inherent value" is the land on which a government has control. If you want to live on that dirt, you deal with that currency. Gold ends up just being any other commodity, but with a history that makes it unique in a way no crypto can.
It's funny how much weight is placed on this word "intrinsic", as if we need to penetrate down to some singular identity layer of a thing to be comfortable assigning it value as a store of anything.
Exactly what that layer is supposed to look like is always somehow described with gobs of words that easily map onto other things that people have already valued for millenia.
You might as well just ask, "is it popular with some people"? If the answer is yes, it's probably a carrier of human interest to some degree, regardless of whatever snooty value systems may be applied to that, so you can likely buy it low and sell it high with a slightly-educated squint at a moving average chart.
(I noticed that people really like to think they are good at assigning value to things, so perhaps this comes down to some core human fear...certainly the typical concern about future outcomes also applies, in which we learn that people have apparently never heard of contingency planning and calculated risk...both of which may be even more useful than intrinsic-whatever subjectivity)
Nor do paper dollars (or paper rupees). They're special because a group of people said they were, which isn't that different from cryptocurrency in concept.
"Describe business owners for us"
"Describe humans for us"
It's intrinsic value comes from being an excellent form of currency and store of value - easy to store, fast to send, easy to verify, easy to hold personally, difficult to create more of, etc.. Up until Bitcoin there were not digital forms of money that came close. Physical forms of money are hindered by being physical which means transportation and validation are more complicated.
It's not easy to find a form of money that has all these properties above, Bitcoin and other crypto currencies do which is WHY they are valuable. That is their intrinsic value - being good at being money.
i would argue that bitcoin isn't good money at the moment, since certainty of value is one property that is very high on the list of requirements, and bitcoin lacks certainty (or stability).
It's very good at being a speculative asset - like gold. But not money. Not yet anyway.
I'm not saying it can never be good money - that's what people are speculating about!
A Ponzi scheme is where the con artist tricks you into thinking you bought an asset when really they just pocketed most of the money, giving you back a little bit and calling an 'investment return'
No matter whether you think Bitcoin has real 'value' or not, that has nothing to do with a ponzi scheme. You can buy Bitcoin and hold it yourself without a middle man.
It's no different than holding stocks or gold, you can buy/sell the full asset at anytime. There's no middle man preventing you from selling the full asset and take 'interest payments' instead.
Which means new money needs to be perpetually flowing into the system simply to secure the ledger. But that is all wasted, so it is actually a negative-sum wealth transfer if we include all the actual useful things we could've done with the energy.
If you buy beanie babies or gold, there is no such siphoning.
I’ll reply to your criticism anyways - There is absolutely energy required to store gold, monitor gold, protect gold, transport gold, mine gold, etc… any financial system requires energy to operate.
I am not convinced that cryptocurrency qualifies as a Ponzi scheme (the real distinction is that the person at the top knows they’re selling a fraud) but it’s certainly driven by pure speculation.
It's really simple. Take for example, Bitcoin:
When Bitcoin reaches its next all time high, literally everyone is in (unrealised) profit. However, to get that 'profit' they have to sell it; mostly starts with the few rich speculators at the top of the pyramid accumulating starting to sell and a new fool who buys in late.
The next time Bitcoin crashes, the ones at the bottom who bought in late and hold it always lose.
Therefore the criteria is met and it is a Ponzi scheme and that is what Bitcoin is really useful for.
Maybe it’s a super ponzi because unlike BTC, Amazon can keep issuing common stock, which pays no dividend. BTC is capped at 21M.
Non-dividend stock is shuffling funny tokens between investors who hope it will be worth more in the future.
So either lots of things are ponzis or maybe they are not ponzis at all, and the definition doesn’t work.
Hey did you guys know one time tulips got really over priced too?
A ponzi scheme is where interest on the investment are funded by other investors in the scheme. Unless you are talking about some interest earning crypto program, maybe THAT is a ponzi scheme. But the crypto you buy and sell on an open exchange is definitely not.
Learn what words mean.
Where does the "value" of Bitcoin come from? From being able to sell it to new "investors" at higher margin than you originally "invested" into it.
The Bitcoin network creates no actual value. Everything is percieved speculation on its (apparent lack of) usefulness. You cannot convert Bitcoin back into the energy that was used to compute it. It's a wealth transfer mechanism from those who don't understand how it works to those who do.
It's value comes from being a digital store of value. Before bitcoin there was none. You had a bank account which was a proxy for physical cash. There was no way to hold the cash personally, digitally, and send it anywhere you want.
Before Bitcoin the best analog was gold - hard to create more of versus fiat which is incredible easy to dilute which is why you would want to diversify out of it. Gold though is slow to send, hard to verify, etc...
Bitcoin basically has the properties of gold in electronic form - hard to create, easy to send, easy to verify, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth can be held securely in your hand.
THAT is what makes Bitcoin valuable. Show me an alternative store of value with those properties.