hackingforfun

Canadian mobile networks are more expensive than the US, and are some of the most expensive in the world [1].

[1] https://openmedia.org/article/item/2021-rewheel-report-shows...

The CFTC does have some jurisdiction.

Coinbase: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8369-21

Kraken: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8433-21

> Often here in HN I see comments saying that you must hop from job to job in order to get raises

That's because it's a pretty easy way to get a significant raise. If staying at one job, the raises are likely to be less significant due to them only being able to raise it a certain percent a year due to policy (unless there is a significant title or role change).

Now if you get another job for a higher rate and then ask your current employer to match it, and you are valuable enough that they agree, that is another way.

I don't think most coins will go to zero at some point, some will, but most is too broad.

I also don't see any reason why new coins wouldn't keep getting created. Basically, what's been happening will continue. This is what I see.

You can diversify in crypto, but you have to educate yourself and pick and choose. For example, you could diversify into payment systems, metaverse tokens, smart contract platforms, oracles, prediction markets, cross-chain interoperability, DeFi, NFTs, etc. There aren't as well defined categories as in equities, but there are some ways to categorize them.

Are there equivalent protections like in equities? No. Is crypto as mature of a market? No. Is crypto high risk? Yes. However, cryptocurriences, or at least specific ones, like Bitcoin, are increasingly being considered an asset class [1].

[1] https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/jp-morgan-wealth-ceo-says-cl...

> What stops a company from currently creating a more automated solution for real estate transactions except for current laws or an inability to integrate with government?

They have no incentive to change how they've done things. I do think it would be cool if there was an automated solution for real estate transactions that didn't require crypto (or smart contracts). That would be great and I think someone should do it if they can.

> So maybe it's not so much skirting of laws, but sometimes also working around systems, not with a bad intention, but because things aren't necessarily keeping up with technological change.

I think this is right on the mark. The US banking system is a great example. Many of the arguments I see against the benefits of instant payments in crypto are from people in Europe, where instant payments are commonplace. I do think the competition and innovation in crypto forces existing legacy structures to innovate, which IMO is a good thing. The other thing is to consider those who are unbanked and unable to participate in existing structures, but do have smart phones. I think crypto can play a part in their lives as well.

> Also, could an open ledger make corruption more visible and harder to get away with? Yes, it could. Will it? I'm not so sure.

I agree. I'm not sure crypto will supersede all existing structures. I do like the idea of governments and politicians having to be more transparent, but I don't think they will give up what they have now.

A DAO can automate things currently handled by humans. There may need to still be some human involvement (and probably should be), but I'd say there can probably be less involvement than there is now in, for example, real estate transactions. It doesn't even have to be a DAO, it can just be a smart contract. Things like escrow can be automated. These things can also improve transparency assuming they are done on an open ledger. That could make corruption more visible and harder to get away with. There is more to this technology than just evading securities laws.

Some people in the countries you mentioned are making more playing Axie than they could otherwise [1].

I'm not advocating for Axie Infinity, but I think there are multiple sides to this.

[1] https://restofworld.org/2021/axie-infinity/

I think it would be great if cash was a safe option. I.e. the rates offered would be higher than inflation, so that the value of cash is not eroded. QE leads to people investing in riskier assets, treating stocks like a savings account, which to me does not seem right.

I agree and think the QE from March 2020 only lead people to believe that stocks are safe assets. Then again if The Fed keeps printing, maybe it all just keeps going.

This is good to know. I wasn't aware of this website. However, you can't live off of 7.12% on a limit of $10k electronic bonds.

I do wish savings accounts still had high interest rates and there wasn't so much incentive to invest in riskier assets like stocks.

I agree, although I think that having a decentralized and modern payment layer is also a part of Web3.

People owning their own data, instead of companies like Facebook and Google, also seems promising, so I haven't written off the ownership layer yet.

NFTs I don't really care about and don't understand the hype.

Metaverse can also be a part of Web3 (Decentraland, The Sandbox, etc), but we'll see where all that goes along with Meta, Microsoft, and all the other companies talking about the metaverse.

I do think there's an issue with companies like Facebook owning peoples' data. Instead, with Web3, the idea is that people own their own data, can verify who they are (they own their private keys), and can choose to interact with services on the web and share their data as they see fit.

I agree with you though that it's great to be able to download movies or music (even though the trend seems to be moving more and more towards streaming). I don't think Web3 means that everything is arbitrarily limited though, it means that it's more user controlled [1].

[1] https://blog.coinbase.com/understanding-web-3-a-user-control...

It's also important so that if Ethereum does ever successfully switch to proof of stake, it will be sufficiently decentralized enough already, due to starting on proof of work. Coins starting on proof of stake (including "Ethereum killers") may not have sufficient distribution to be considered decentralized.

Could be something with Meta. Metaverse crypto tokens also have likely been rallying due to that, and maybe that helped spread the word about Web3.

Web3 isn't new though. Here is an article from Coinbase from 2018 on it: https://blog.coinbase.com/understanding-web-3-a-user-control...

Breathalyzers have to calibrated on a regular basis in order to function properly. These are devices that will essentially brick cars if there are false readings. I don't think the lawmakers have thought this through.

> those who are healthy and under 50 can more or less treat COVID like any other common illness.

Is that true? I thought that changed with the variants?

Where are you getting this information from? Is it from this study [1]? Real money is also going into crypto [2, 3, 4, 5]. I think it's quite an accusation to say that Tether is always the reason crypto comes back. People also "buy the dip". In some cases, maybe it is Tether, I don't know, but saying in all cases that it is Tether making crypto bounce back seems like a stretch to me.

You assume you know why it bounces back every time after reaching whatever bottom it does, so, I'm also wondering, what do you think triggers it to start going down after reaching its tops?

[1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3195066

[2] https://www.microstrategy.com/en/investor-relations/press/mi...

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-03/novogratz...

[4] https://news.bitcoin.com/kevin-oleary-crypto-exposure-greate...

[5] https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/28/investing/tesla-bitcoin/index...

I'm just wondering, now that they have USD, after selling BTC, what do you think they are they going to do with the USD? It's not like they can extract easily USD from Binance or KuCoin (two of the most popular asian crypto exchanges, where USDT is also the most popular). As I alluded to in a comment above, the reason they are using USDT in the first place is because they can't deal with USD (or fiat) easily. So do they go into some other stablecoin, or keep it in BTC (or ETH), and try to move that to another exchange which is better suited as a fiat gateway? What if this other exchange is a heavily KYC'd exchange that they don't have access to in their jurisdiction, or that it would take a long time to get access to, even if it is available in their jurisdiction? There's also fiat withdrawal limits to consider, which are generally lower than crypto withdrawal limits. Also, to even be able to withdrawal fiat, instead of crypto, requires even higher levels of KYC, more processing time, no guarantee that they will be approved, etc. So, what do you think they will do then? This is also what TimeBearingDown was referring to in a sibling thread.

I haven’t used Java in a long time. What is in favor now?

How do you feel about stocks that have completely unrealistic P/E ratios? Is that not the same speculation that happens in crypto? And yes, I agree, prices don't go up unless people are putting more in, but I'm just saying that crypto is not unique here. Yes, traditional companies can liquidate their assets, but my point is, a lot of what's going on in stocks, at least ones greatly differing from traditional P/E ratios, is also speculation.

Also, in terms of siphoning of "real money" from the ecosystem each time, if some of the money going in is fake, i.e. Tether printing without having 1:1 USD backed up, and that is going back into crypto, then how do we quantify that exactly, in terms of "real money" lost? Is it because "real money" is also buying at the inflated prices, or is it because some of the Tether that is buying other crypto is backed up by "real money"? I'm trying to understand the argument here.

They also may cash out to another fiat currency, no? I also am not sure I agree that they would all even cash out to fiat. I was asking what are the guarantees that they would cash out to USD, considering that why they may be holding USDT in the first place is to avoid US regulation? Something else to consider is that Tether is also more popular outside of the US. I'm just saying that I think it's an assumption that they all would cash out. It likely depends on how crypto as a whole is doing at that point, and I also think it's an assumption that crypto won't survive Tether's crash. There may be short term drops which lead to these assumptions being true, but really, no one knows for sure.

If people aren't buying as much Bitcoin at $100k+ (I assume you are referring to Bitcoin), then what will cause it to go to $1m? I don't think they can have a guaranteed pump like you are saying.

What guarantees that everyone would sell that Bitcoin for USD?

It was The DAO hack [1].

[1] https://www.gemini.com/cryptopedia/the-dao-hack-makerdao

Can Tether give you Bitcoin as a redemption? Do you have a source for that?

It's likely that the upcoming Bitcoin ETF was approved because it is based on Bitcoin futures [1], and since there is already an established regulatory framework for those, under the jurisdiction of the CFTC, it was allowed.

The CFTC also said, in 2019, "virtual currencies, such as Bitcoin, have been determined to be commodities under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA)" [2]. They also fined Kraken for offering margin to clients, but "failing to register as a futures commission merchant" [3].

It appears the SEC also has jurisdiction over certain cryptos that have been determined to be securities as well, since they have raised several cases for those [4, 5, 6, 7].

The IRS also considers virtual currencies to be property [8].

Based on this, there is already regulation and asset classification already going on, although I do think it would be great to have more clarity and agreement between the different regulating bodies, regarding crypto, in the US. For now, maybe it's just that some cryptos aren't considered securities until they are called out to be, and the rest would be considered commodities, at least until we hear more about this from regulators.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/15/bitcoin-etfs-may-finally-mak...

[2] https://www.cftc.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/oceo_bitcoi...

[3] https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8433-21

[4] https://www.sec.gov/enforce/33-10715-s

[5] https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-262

[6] https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2020-338

[7] https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2021-172

[8] https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

I agree that consumers should be educated that crypto is highly speculative.

However, an accredited investor might just be someone who got rich through inheritance, i.e., not at all through their own doing, so I don't think that accredited investors necessarily know more about investing. They can, in theory, weather a loss more, depending how much they bet, although AFAIK there are not restrictions on them betting it all.

People are allowed to buy lottery tickets. They are also allowed to bet it all at a casino. Why shouldn't someone be able to put even a small amount of money in crypto? Maybe it pays off for them, maybe it doesn't (just like lottery / casino / etc., and I think they have a better chance in crypto).

That said I don't really like centralized crypto lenders like Celsuis, Nexo, etc. If anything, I think people have a better chance just buying crypto at spot price and not lending it out, although if someone really was set on lending out their crypto, they are better off with the decentralized lending alternatives.

> So how exactly do cryptocurrencies, with their anti-inflation agenda, provide a solution to this issue? The answer is they don’t. In fact, inflation can be a useful tool for redistributing wealth.

Inflationary monetary policies are making the rich richer. Just look at what's happened to those that were already wealthy, since March 2020. If everyone does not have equal access to inflating assets then I don't see how inflation can be a useful tool for redistributing wealth.

It looks like a Bitcoin futures ETF is nearing approval and could go live next week [1][2]. My guess is that people are pricing that in.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/15/bitcoin-etfs-may-finally-mak...

[2] https://twitter.com/JSeyff/status/1449010847074897933

I don't think that the US dollar is a scam but I think The Fed is struggling to keep it afloat. Also, the ever increasing debt of the US concerns me, as well as all the money printing. I just wonder, where does it end? How does it end? Just borrow more and print more? Drop rates to 0%, and then go negative if there's no further to go? Does all that seem sustainable? I do hope inflation will drop when / if The Fed raises rates again. Maybe that will bring some sort of balance. We'll have to see what happens. I don't think the US debt could ever possibly be paid off now though, and we'll have to keep raising the debt ceiling or remove it. There's also some absurd ideas like minting a trillion dollar platinum coin [1]. I just don't think this ends well.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trillion-dollar_coin