wellboy

Why do admire them so much. They are one of the worst exchanges when it comes to customer support and there are massive complaints about them holding vast amounts of money of customers hostage?

Then comes insider trading during the BCH launch in addition. Coinbase isn't well liked in the crypto community and numerous questionable practices definitely can quickly backfire.

You're making the assumption that crypto will fail 100%, which is arguably not a smart thing to say, because no one knows for sure.

Furthermore, Smart contracts are a business content.

Yes that's why they hybrid.

Yes, 3rd gen blockchains aren't blockchains anymore. :)

Such as?

Pretty much all the newer ones, Nano, Iota and Eth probably soon to.

There is also a debate to use delegated PoS or a hybrid of PoS and PoW to get both of their upsides with none of tbeir downsides.

High fees are only a problem of PoW blockchains, not of PoS blockchains which are becoming the majority right now.

Blockchains are moving away from PoW to PoS, which requires a millionth of the energy use, so that's not really an argument.

Slide 1: Obviously you need to convert from and to Fiat since crypto isn't used by the majority of people duh.

Slide 2 & 3: Yes, 1st generation blockchains are slow and have high fees. That's why Bitcoin has just implemented the Lightning Network and there are 3rd generation blockchains like Nano and IOTA that have zero fees and instant transactions. Duh.

Slide 4: False dichotomy. Yes, there are a couple of scams in the crypto sphere, even 5% of the top 100 are scams, e.g. Eos, Verge, Veritaseum. Is 5% 100%? No. Duh + Facepalm.

It's a bit of a better signal, but still not that significant with the dow jones also being down 25% over the last several weeks.

No one claimed that they invented electric cars.

Their electric cars simply perform 50% better than the vast majority of other electric cars in every aspect, speed, acceleration, range (very important). Then you can also add design, driving comfort, software integration, where they beat any other electric car (manufacturer).

Thus, their technology is vastly superior.

Mastering manfucacturing isn't easy for a young company, though, it simply takes time.

The other car companies had more than 100 years to figure it out, give Tesla a few more years to catch up with them.

Yes, but a scam is knowingly screwing someone over.

Is it a scam when you invest in promising technology that, yes, could not work out?

Ethereum was also a scam, which would have given you 10,000,000% profit?

Except that Tesla is the currently the strongest player to take the biggest market in history, autonomous driving with electric cars and Ford isn't.

Probably because they are a new company and want to innovate on manufacturing to make it 5x better than the industry standard like with everything they do.

Yes, but not right now or in 3 months like that managers says it.

This is just spreading unsubstantiated FUD.

Only that they would have gone bankrupt if it hadn't been for the government in 2008 when it was around 105 years, next to a few other large car manufacturers.

That's an accurate description. Though acquiring the best electric car and autonomous driving technology is probably a magnitude harder than ramping up manufacturing.

Manufacturing also isn't easy, but it also isn't super hard compared to electric cars and autonomous driving.

Dozens of car companies have managed to do it, while none have managed to build electric cars and AD well yet.

-8.5% on one day is a very weak signal. Next week it's up 8.5% again.

You need to factor in future profits, where Tesla is the strongest player for electric cars, autonomous driving (the first multitrillion dollar market) and benefits of the Musk ecosystem (Boring company, SolarCity, Hyperloop)

Ford isn't really one of the car companies that looks like it will remain relevant in 10 years time.

This top manager seems to miss that Musk can raise a couple of billion whenever he wants.

How did he get to manage his own fund if he doesn't even get that.

Well that's a weak argument. Just give them a new address. Many bitcoin owners have 100+ addresses within their wallet.

Cool what's your address, bank account balance and your kids names?

Ha very cool. Though who pays for storing the data then?

Given that probably 90% of FBs engineering power was spent on scalability and data mining, it seem more feasible than you make it sound.

The tech that is proposed in the article sounds a lot like Nano's block lattice, where everyone has their own blockchain.

You could even potentially use it to run this social network by just increasing transaction data size.

Isn't this just switching costs?

The author assumes that a change in a process never amortize. However, some changes cost time and money yes, but they amortize after a few months ans are worth it.

Yes, some changes might lead to worse processes than others, but most changes aren't.

It all comes down to a good CEO, if you make too many changes that make it worse, the business becomes bankrupt after a few years. If your changes amortize, even only slightly, your business stays afloat or improves.

I have to say, I have never seen so much bad press about facebook in such a short time frame.

Seems like this is picking up a lot of steam.

Or he lacks the social awareness, introspectiveness to see how his product has a negative impact.

Society only sees it sexist if it's done by the overrepresented gender, just like racism.