hailwren

Exact same thing happened to me. Wild.

What bearing does the existence of fake liquidity have on the equivalence between real liquidity and adoption?

This is a vacuous non-sequitur.

You moved the goalposts a fair amount between

> Not just “we’re still working out some of the details,” but literally none of it exists.

and

> flag-bearer for web3

These are projects that are attempting solutions. I wasn’t claiming they work, but they’re figuring things out and seeing what needs to be rebuilt to get a working social model on top of web3.

This seems like rhetoric. Have you tried looking?

Counterexamples: lens.xyz, farcaster.xyz, urbit.org

> This is a vacuous non-sequitur

In finance, liquidity _is_ adoption. They’re the same thing.

> Even though these "financial primitives" on the blockchain are neat from a technical standpoint, they tend to blow up precisely because the markets are not liquid enough (so second-order effects are amplified).

I would rephrase this to say that the less liquid state of blockchain markets limits the available set of financial primitives which are resistant to manipulation.

It’s true, but if liquidity is the only hurdle — I think you’ve more or less ceded that blockchain provides value. It just needs wider adoption. (Probably a stronger support of blockchain than I would personally offer.)

> because they are created by tech people who don't understand the domain. They just start building all of these things that seem useful to tech people, but completely miss what is actually important.

This is just false. idk what to tell you, but there are plenty of major builders in the crypto space who are highly regarded in tradfi. See ie jump

Even if it were true (it’s not), it’s also a thing that could be said about any product built by tech people and hasn’t really seemed to play out that way in most other places.

Right, so it turns out that there are a fair amount of operations you can perform on financial objects to change their properties. You can buy, sell, combine, or split their risk profiles in different manners to get properties that are useful in different scenarios.

Mortgage tranches played a big role in 2008, Black-Scholes helps us describe the behavior of options contracts, and maybe the most accessible for someone not familiar w/ finance is the Ray Dalio McNugget story - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/03/how-ray-dalio-helped-launch-...

The EVM specifically gives you a Turing complete financial system and, hence, probably a complete expression of operations on financial structures.

> So basically, you guys are re-inventing what tradfi had years ago, just with worthless(?) tokens instead of debt backed assets.

Crypto has debt backed primitives as well. You’ve linked one. AAVE is a lending protocol. If you don’t like AAVE, maybe you’re looking for DAI.

> but no way to cash out to fiat.

This is just a result of US KYC regulation. Like it or not, this isn’t a choice made by crypto.

> What's the value proposition here?

The value prop is, as the gp said, trustless composability. Crypto (post eth) is to money as the internet is to a mainframe. A kid in a garage can build a financial primitive on top of a “blue chip” and the “blue chip” builder doesn’t have to worry (vis a vis bugs, which have been a big problem but a lot of progress has been made in that area).

I’m not claiming crypto(I wish there was a word for crypto minus btc) has achieved its end state, but the goal and road map seem very clear. Composable, trust-less finance is a strong use case.

Aside — you really have to decide whether the price is important in crypto or not. Opponents often use phrases like “worthless tokens” and then claim they don’t care ab the price.

How is this different from our current signing key system?

No, there is a way to spoof transfer events on etherscan so that trolls can attach funny coin names to famous wallets.

> However, the rest of us have a name for "bypassing government regulations" - we call it "crime".

I don’t think that’s what we call crime. Isn’t crime the direct violation of government regulations?

By your argument, the use of _any_ currency other than your own government’s would be a crime. Or, is the use of every currency a crime in every other country? When I exchange Euros for JPY in the US, have I committed a crime?

As far as I’m aware, there are no laws against the use of cryptocurrency. There are plenty of laws against things like securities fraud and fraud in general, and those are all generally well and good.

> Some governments have been financially irresponsible in the past, so we need a tool to allow us to bypass all government regulations

I think you should probably gain a clearer understanding of how the currency markets have been behaving over the last year. Many currencies have lost >30% of their value against the USD (which might not matter so much if the USD were the same status as the others).

There’s a weird false equivalence here. Whenever critics hear government oversight and interference, they immediately point to the governments that manage their currency relatively well and say “look, these governments do therefore no one needs to worry”.

History and contemporary geopolitics are both littered with examples of governments that absolutely ruin their population’s lives with currency problems. What if it were possible to have consumer protection regulation and also remove some of the nasty side effects of government and institutional preference in monetary policy?

You’re both completely missing the point (hence, my somewhat terse original reply).

It really doesn’t matter to the meaning of my comment whether the first sentence exists or not. You can simply remove it if you like, the rest of the comment is still comprehensible. And, most importantly, its main point - to differentiate between the kind of exchange the gp was referencing and the kind the post is about, still stands.

This is all just a case of nitpicking some small detail that is so common and annoying. It’s the “your battery is dying” to a screenshot.

Even disregarding that, are we really posting wikipedia links to No True Scotsman in 2022? Has anyone not heard of NTS? It just comes across as pedantic.

Finally, you’re all hung up on the definition of “crypto enthusiast” — but it doesn’t even have meaning in the specific context. It’s just an attempt to shorten a much longer comment (like this one).

In my head, crypto enthusiast was just the 15 character version of “that group of people who are very interested in the programming and theory of decentralized economies. They tend to attend crypto conferences, program solidity or other smart contract dsls, and use phrases like ‘not your keys, not your crypto’”.

In that context the statement was mostly tautological stage setting for the rest of the comment, so for the whole thing to get derailed by low effort, kind of rude, attempts “but it’s an almost, but not quite logical fallacy (well, NTS isn’t actually a logical fallacy, but I am going to snarkily imply it is one)” sniping is not only wasted space … it’s boring.

Sure, differentiating between two categories of things is a logical fallacy I guess.

Not sure what gemini has to do with this, but most people who actually think crypto is interesting will tell you that _any_ centralized exchange (to include coinbase, gemini, the NYSE, even the ones in the future that haven’t been made yet) is against the ethos of crypto. Uniswap is an entirely different class of thing.

The only scams possible in the _logic_ of Uniswap are those which would be considered bugs in the code.

Obviously, as this article points out — that’s not a panacea for _all_ scams. But I am surprised that people on a forum about hacking can’t see why eliminating an entire class of bugs could be useful.

Ok, you can replace dynamic pricing with dynamic tipping in my original comment if that makes it more comprehensible for you.

I mean, this is what is happening with the dynamic tipping system and none of these things appear to be happening.

I also hate tipping everywhere, but coffee shops might also like to adjust their prices slightly for customers that don’t mind paying a bit more for well paid staff and for those customers to whom price is a major concern when choosing where to purchase their coffee.

Dynamic pricing makes some sense in the concept of trying to capture maximum demand, it just feels horrible as a customer.

Coinbase avoided this fate by being a us regulated company. FTX.us is still above water. It’s the Bahamas based company that was able to cook the books and is now defunct.

As for Binance, they have the SAFU (https://academy.binance.com/en/glossary/secure-asset-fund-fo...) which they just topped up to $1B at current market prices (today). You can verify the balances on chain, but there aren’t any statements about outstanding obligations, and there are no guarantees that those funds haven’t been earmarked for other things.

Their point is that if you have the money to buy $1.1B of something off market, you should also have the money to buy $1.1B of something on market. Any time someone posts an ask at or below $22, you simply fill the order.

Median earned income 10 years after enrolling at an Ivy is about 2x the all schools average.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/09/14/this-...

> do most of any nomads actually pay the same taxes that a local would in the places they visit?

No, of course not. The rub is that 0 nomads are employed by companies in the places they visit. If they’re American, they’re still paying US tax (although there is a set aside for your first 100k if you spend 330/365 days outside of the us).

Incentivized visas are becoming more widespread, but you haven’t really presented a clear case that nomads _should_ be paying tax. It’s by-and-large legal to not pay tax on the income you earn while on vacation in a foreign country and there are clear prohibitions against working for local companies.

If the country your passport is from doesn’t require you to pay income tax when you aren’t residing there, then you haven’t met the requirements for tax in any country that you visited this year.

So, you might be interested in https://github.com/SimulaVR/Simula . There have been a few examples of VR windows managers on Linux which don’t require an entire OS rewrite.

Is that the solution Meta will go w/? almost certainly not. But replacing a WM for a different “view” of your OS is a pretty common thing on Linux. (For some distros like Arch, replace isn’t the right word. You have to install whichever one you’d like from the beginning)

For civilian applications, sure. But Shor’s seems like a good enough reason for defense and defense have deep enough pockets to get this somewhat rolling.

Errmm? He says “we are making progress in slowing the rate of price increases”.

(making progress in (slowing the (rate of price increases)))

3 ————————— 2 ————— 1 ———————————

The question is what you think “progress” is doing in that sentence. Slowing the rate => 2nd deriv is decreasing but progress, to me, implies that third deriv is what is being pointed at. 2nd deriv would be “we are slowing” to me.

I’m not sure what inflation number you’re looking at, but CPI for Oct/Nov/Dec of 2021 was: 6.2%, 6.8%, 7%

Not the one gp was referencing, but here’s the Reagan quote pretty much verbatim from Biden:

“we are making progress in slowing the rate of price increases.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/12/biden-says-cpi-inflation-rep...

Yep. This is what we do in finance. It sucks a bit because most of our comp is bonus and you only get your base pay on garden leave, but I’m shocked this isn’t a requirement.

Are you conflating land vehicles with air ones? Because autopilot flies more hours than pilots in 2022.

Luckily there haven’t been any technological advancements in aviation or computation since May 16, 1977.