Bitcoin-Explain to me how to buy these things (2 Viewers)

[Captain Cranks]

It feels like people get tripped up with some of the hyperbole, speculation, and even the term "currency" when talking about crypto. At their core, these are decentralized businesses. The coins and tokens represent equity in companies and as a holder of those assets you can benefit from their growth.

In the 90s, the vast majority of internet companies never had revenue streams and their value was built on hype, hope, and fomo that ended in speculative losses.  The average investor didn't understand much about the technology and the business case was obscure. Yet, as time went on, the use case became clearer and from the ashes of a busted bubble grew the tech juggernauts we know today that led to early retirements for many.

Will Bitcoin, Ethereum, and the rest be around in 10 years? I don't know. But I do know there's a legitimate use case for blockchain technology and to dismiss the sector as nothing but valueless speculation would be misguided. 

 

[KGB]

Oh yeah, you are a gambling man. SPACs are a better comparison because so many of those were ideas not fully formed companies hence the SPAC where you don’t go through the same audit/review process as an IPO. Trump’s SPAC is the perfect example. There wasn’t even a product at the start. No different than a metaverse/gaming alt coin hoping for success. The alt coins that don’t even have something tangible are even more questionable.

Yep, lost bigly.  like 50K or something on trump.  oof.

but just fyi to all,  I post about gambling stuff, not big money investments which we are very boring. lol

 

[jm192]

It feels like people get tripped up with some of the hyperbole, speculation, and even the term "currency" when talking about crypto. At their core, these are decentralized businesses. The coins and tokens represent equity in companies and as a holder of those assets you can benefit from their growth.

In the 90s, the vast majority of internet companies never had revenue streams and their value was built on hype, hope, and fomo that ended in speculative losses.  The average investor didn't understand much about the technology and the business case was obscure. Yet, as time went on, the use case became clearer and from the ashes of a busted bubble grew the tech juggernauts we know today that led to early retirements for many.

Will Bitcoin, Ethereum, and the rest be around in 10 years? I don't know. But I do know there's a legitimate use case for blockchain technology and to dismiss the sector as nothing but valueless speculation would be misguided. 

Bitcoin and Ethereum are not “businesses.”  They do not produce goods and services. 
 

There is no earnings report coming from the Bitcoin company.  No projections from the Ethereum company.  You can’t be de-centralized and “be a company.”

There is value in the technology.  I’ve read several times over people saying “the technology is good.”  People just aren’t sold on crypto.  
 

When I invest in a company, I get shareholders reports.  I’m aware of what they make and how they make it.  I can see what their plans are for future profit.  
 

When I speculate on Bitcoin, I’m hoping the next guy will pay more for it than I did.

 

[Captain Cranks]

Bitcoin and Ethereum are not “businesses.”  They do not produce goods and services. 
 

There is no earnings report coming from the Bitcoin company.  No projections from the Ethereum company.  You can’t be de-centralized and “be a company.”

There is value in the technology.  I’ve read several times over people saying “the technology is good.”  People just aren’t sold on crypto.  
 

When I invest in a company, I get shareholders reports.  I’m aware of what they make and how they make it.  I can see what their plans are for future profit.  
 

When I speculate on Bitcoin, I’m hoping the next guy will pay more for it than I did.

Bitcoin and Ethereum allow you to transfer value without a third party. They provide a service. 

When I speculate on Bitcoin, I’m hoping the next guy will pay more for it than I did.

And this is different than speculating on stocks how?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

When I invest in a company, I get shareholders reports.  I’m aware of what they make and how they make it.  I can see what their plans are for future profit.  
 

When I speculate on Bitcoin, I’m hoping the next guy will pay more for it than I did.

How many people actually read the shareholders reports for all the stocks they're invested in?

The reality is the last sentence is true of stocks for most investors too.  People are just hoping that the next guy will pay more for it than they did.  There is no rule that a company has to be worth X amount relative to earnings or profit margin.  The number that people are willing to pay relative to those metrics are just what people are willing to pay relative to those at the time.  The PE ratio for the SP500 has been as high as 65 and as low as 5 at different times.  Just because a company improves as a business or has good earnings doesn't necessarily mean the stock will be worth more.  It's only worth more if people decide they're willing to pay more.  Just look in the stock thread here and you'll find 1000 instances of people complaining that their stock tanked after good earnings.

Obviously there's a lot more "reality" to stocks than crypto, and you're owning a real somewhat tangible thing, but its value still ultimately boils down to whatever people are willing to pay for it, and hoping that someone else will pay more down the line based on any number of reasons which, at that time, may or may not have anything to do with how people value a stock right now.  

 

[jm192]

Bitcoin and Ethereum allow you to transfer value without a third party. They provide a service. 

And this is different than speculating on stocks how?

Does “Bitcoin” make money off the service?  Do they sell it to you?  No.  Coinbase sells it to you.  Crypto.com sells it to you.  You make it sound like Bitcoin is basically Paypal.  That’s not the case.

Apple produces goods and services.  It generates revenue, profits, etc.  We can assign a value to it based on those things.  As the company succeeds, more people buy into it.  Speculation plays a small role in investing in Apple, sure.  But it’s not the only way for Apple stock to have value.  As Apple’s profits increase, more people are motivated to buy in.  
 

Bitcoin is only speculation.  Just like Baseball cards. You buy it at a price.  You hope someone is willing to pay more down the line.  But Bitcoin and baseball cards—they aren’t generating revenue and profits.  People don’t see the Bitcoin earning reports (because they don’t exist) and decide to buy in.  

 

[jm192]

How many people actually read the shareholders reports for all the stocks they're invested in?

The reality is the last sentence is true of stocks for most investors too.  People are just hoping that the next guy will pay more for it than they did.  There is no rule that a company has to be worth X amount relative to earnings or profit margin.  The number that people are willing to pay relative to those metrics are just what people are willing to pay relative to those at the time.  The PE ratio for the SP500 has been as high as 65 and as low as 5 at different times.  Just because a company improves as a business or has good earnings doesn't necessarily mean the stock will be worth more.  It's only worth more if people decide they're willing to pay more.  Just look in the stock thread here and you'll find 1000 instances of people complaining that their stock tanked after good earnings.

Obviously there's a lot more "reality" to stocks than crypto, and you're owning a real somewhat tangible thing, but its value still ultimately boils down to whatever people are willing to pay for it, and hoping that someone else will pay more down the line based on any number of reasons which, at that time, may or may not have anything to do with how people value a stock right now.  

Again, stocks are shares in company that generate profit.  The stock has a value that is related to this.  If crypto had that, then the argument doesn‘T matter, but it’s also not crypto anymore.

It doesn’t.  All I have is the hope someone else decides the asset is worth more than I paid for it.  Whereas my stocks:  there’s value driven by profits/revenue.

Stocks are part speculation.  Crypto is 100%.

 

[Captain Cranks]

Does “Bitcoin” make money off the service?  Do they sell it to you?  No.  Coinbase sells it to you.  Crypto.com sells it to you.  You make it sound like Bitcoin is basically Paypal.  That’s not the case.

Apple produces goods and services.  It generates revenue, profits, etc.  We can assign a value to it based on those things.  As the company succeeds, more people buy into it.  Speculation plays a small role in investing in Apple, sure.  But it’s not the only way for Apple stock to have value.  As Apple’s profits increase, more people are motivated to buy in.  
 

Bitcoin is only speculation.  Just like Baseball cards. You buy it at a price.  You hope someone is willing to pay more down the line.  But Bitcoin and baseball cards—they aren’t generating revenue and profits.  People don’t see the Bitcoin earning reports (because they don’t exist) and decide to buy in.  

You don't seem to have a good grasp of how these economies work and how value is accumulated and distributed. To my earlier point, people get tripped up in the speculation and headlines and stop there. 

 

[jm192]

You don't seem to have a good grasp of how these economies work and how value is accumulated and distributed. To my earlier point, people get tripped up in the speculation and headlines and stop there. 

Do you guys go to like crypto school where they teach you to parrot “you don’t understand xyz.”

The main argument for all crypto proponents seems to be “you don’t understand.”  

 

[Captain Cranks]

Do you guys go to like crypto school where they teach you to parrot “you don’t understand xyz.”

The main argument for all crypto proponents seems to be “you don’t understand.”  

Well, you don't understand. It's obvious with the things you say.  This for example: "There is value in the technology.  I’ve read several times over people saying “the technology is good.”  People just aren’t sold on crypto."

What does that sentence even mean? It's akin to saying, "people are saying "the new gas powered automobile technology is good." People just are sold on automobiles."  

I'm not going to argue with you. If you're having trouble transitioning from the traditional method of equity distribution to the new way but don't want to put in the effort to learn, that's your prerogative. 

 

[jm192]

Well, you don't understand. It's obvious with the things you say.  This for example: "There is value in the technology.  I’ve read several times over people saying “the technology is good.”  People just aren’t sold on crypto."

What does that sentence even mean? It's akin to saying, "people are saying "the new gas powered automobile technology is good." People just are sold on automobiles."  

I'm not going to argue with you. If you're having trouble transitioning from the traditional method of equity distribution to the new way but don't want to put in the effort to learn, that's your prerogative. 

Maybe you don’t understand?

People in this thread have said there’s value in the blockchain technology.  But that doesn’t mean “Bitcoin to the moon!!”

The only argument you guys have—when someone questions your reasoning on bitcoin is “you don’t understand.”  “You don’t want to take the time to learn.”  You can’t argue against any of the counter points, so you attack the credibility of the person questioning it.  
 

And that to me—is one if the biggest strikes against crypto.  You dismiss people who don’t see the value as not understanding.  
 

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Does “Bitcoin” make money off the service?  Do they sell it to you?  No.  Coinbase sells it to you.  Crypto.com sells it to you.  You make it sound like Bitcoin is basically Paypal.  That’s not the case.

Apple produces goods and services.  It generates revenue, profits, etc.  We can assign a value to it based on those things.  As the company succeeds, more people buy into it.  Speculation plays a small role in investing in Apple, sure.  But it’s not the only way for Apple stock to have value.  As Apple’s profits increase, more people are motivated to buy in.

This is only half true, though.  Stock prices are motivated by profits only in the sense that people have generally agreed to buy/sell them based somewhat on profits.  Ultimately at its core though, a stock is worth only what people are willing to pay for it.

Within the last year APPL's P/E ratio was 35.  A year from now it could be 6.  Or 15.  Or 30.  The company's profits could go up while the value of the stock goes down 60%.  Profits are only a guide, and only a guide so much as people have generally decided they're going to use them as a guide.  There are 1000 different metrics people use to buy/sell stocks.  They're all just invented, and only hold true so long as people continue using them.  There's no rule that says a stock has to be worth X amount relative to profits.  There's no rule that says a stock's price has to go up as profits go up, and often times it doesn't.  10 years from now people could be trading stocks based on which ticker has the coolest name.  It's incredibly unlikely, but ultimately stocks are worth what people will pay for them and the current metrics used to trade stocks are only relevant for as long as people decide those are the metrics they want to use.  Stocks have a floor of real world value based on their assets, but that is such a small number relative to the stock price of any company it barely matters.

People could eventually decide to start buying/selling crypto based on any number of metrics in the same way.  Maybe it's number of users, maybe it's number of transactions per hour, maybe it's transaction speed, who knows.  The institutional investors probably already do this and have some set of metrics they use in deciding when to buy.  It just hasn't permeated to the entire investment community through generations of repetition like stock metrics have, and as I mentioned above even after hundreds of years of stock trading there is still wild variation in what a stock is worth relative to its performance as a company.

 

[jm192]

This is only half true, though.  Stock prices are motivated by profits only in the sense that people have generally agreed to buy/sell them based somewhat on profits.  Ultimately at its core though, a stock is worth only what people are willing to pay for it.

Within the last year APPL's P/E ratio was 35.  A year from now it could be 6.  Or 15.  Or 30.  The company's profits could go up while the value of the stock goes down 60%.  Profits are only a guide, and only a guide so much as people have generally decided they're going to use them as a guide.  There are 1000 different metrics people use to buy/sell stocks.  They're all just invented, and only hold true so long as people continue using them.  There's no rule that says a stock has to be worth X amount relative to profits.  There's no rule that says a stock's price has to go up as profits go up, and often times it doesn't.  10 years from now people could be trading stocks based on which ticker has the coolest name.  It's incredibly unlikely, but ultimately stocks are worth what people will pay for them and the current metrics used to trade stocks are only relevant for as long as people decide those are the metrics they want to use.

People could eventually decide to start buying/selling crypto based on any number of metrics in the same way.  Maybe it's number of users, maybe it's number of transactions per hour, maybe it's transaction speed, who knows.  The institutional investors probably already do this and have some set of metrics they use in deciding when to buy.  It just hasn't permeated to the entire investment community through generations of repetition like stock metrics have, and as I mentioned above even after hundreds of years of stock trading there is still wild variation in what a stock is worth relative to its performance as a company.

But that Value—to some extent—does affect what people are willing to pay for it.  Calling it a “guide” seems accurate.  Crypto doesn’t have that. There is no “guide.”  Maybe people settle on “transactions per hour.”  But maybe there’s never a consistent metric that drives the price.   

 

[Captain Cranks]

Maybe you don’t understand?

People in this thread have said there’s value in the blockchain technology.  But that doesn’t mean “Bitcoin to the moon!!”

The only argument you guys have—when someone questions your reasoning on bitcoin is “you don’t understand.”  “You don’t want to take the time to learn.”  You can’t argue against any of the counter points, so you attack the credibility of the person questioning it.  
 

And that to me—is one if the biggest strikes against crypto.  You dismiss people who don’t see the value as not understanding.  
 

Where did I say "Bitcoin to the moon!" I said something quite different, actually.

If I felt you wanted to "understand", we'd be having a different conversation. Instead, you just want to dig in and argue, now creating strawman arguments.

So, I will give you what you're looking for. "You're right. Crypto is speculative garbage. Don't waste your time."

 

[Captain Cranks]

But that Value—to some extent—does affect what people are willing to pay for it.  Calling it a “guide” seems accurate.  Crypto doesn’t have that. There is no “guide.”  Maybe people settle on “transactions per hour.”  But maybe there’s never a consistent metric that drives the price.   

Network Value

 

[stbugs]

It feels like people get tripped up with some of the hyperbole, speculation, and even the term "currency" when talking about crypto. At their core, these are decentralized businesses. The coins and tokens represent equity in companies and as a holder of those assets you can benefit from their growth.

In the 90s, the vast majority of internet companies never had revenue streams and their value was built on hype, hope, and fomo that ended in speculative losses.  The average investor didn't understand much about the technology and the business case was obscure. Yet, as time went on, the use case became clearer and from the ashes of a busted bubble grew the tech juggernauts we know today that led to early retirements for many.

Will Bitcoin, Ethereum, and the rest be around in 10 years? I don't know. But I do know there's a legitimate use case for blockchain technology and to dismiss the sector as nothing but valueless speculation would be misguided. 

I will say that the companies that did make it through the dot com bubble bursting were companies that did actually have revenue. The ones that didn’t already were complete speculation and aren’t around anymore. Of the FAANG crew only Amazon and Apple were public companies during the burst and they had revenues and were legit businesses even if unprofitable. I’ve often brought up search engines as an example that out of blockchain, the winner might be something that hasn’t happened yet. Google was way after all the early established search engines and now the rest of them are dust. Wouldn’t surprise me at all to see late entrants pap the field.

No one is dismissing any tech but Terra/Luna went from what $50B to nada and there was no impact outside of investors losing money. That’s what we mean in terms of no real tangible business. I get the metaverses/games because they aren’t really different from Fortnite, an entertainment business if you will.

 

[urbanhack]

Bitcoin and Ethereum are not “businesses.”  They do not produce goods and services. 
 

There is no earnings report coming from the Bitcoin company.  No projections from the Ethereum company.  You can’t be de-centralized and “be a company.”

There is value in the technology.  I’ve read several times over people saying “the technology is good.”  People just aren’t sold on crypto.  
 

When I invest in a company, I get shareholders reports.  I’m aware of what they make and how they make it.  I can see what their plans are for future profit.  
 

When I speculate on Bitcoin, I’m hoping the next guy will pay more for it than I did.

When the internet came about it brought with it http / apis / xml / tcp/ip…all of the things we use today…the underlying structure of Web 2.0.  Blockchain and underlying tech of Web 3.0 with ETH and smart contracts is the same thing…there is no company per se. 

 

[stbugs]

People could eventually decide to start buying/selling crypto based on any number of metrics in the same way.  Maybe it's number of users, maybe it's number of transactions per hour, maybe it's transaction speed, who knows.  The institutional investors probably already do this and have some set of metrics they use in deciding when to buy.  It just hasn't permeated to the entire investment community through generations of repetition like stock metrics have, and as I mentioned above even after hundreds of years of stock trading there is still wild variation in what a stock is worth relative to its performance as a company.

This right here is the dot com bubble in a nutshell. In 1999, the term was eyeballs and it was the new measure to give companies with no revenue a market cap or reason why they were worth something. It was BS and created a lot of value from nowhere and took it away just as fast (seems like today). It may have been a way to see how many users there are but it’s not a measure of company value. At the end of the day, the measure will be on how much revenue and profit there is. As you said, the market will add the ratios it’s willing to pay, 20x Sales or 2x Sales or 45x earnings or 10x earnings, but the metrics you mentioned will not measure the companies value. They can be used to infer or anticipate future revenue but they aren’t going to be measure value. That’s where the dot com bubble happened. Facebook’s revenue per user is way different than Pinterest’s. If Ask Jeeves wasn’t successful in turning eyeballs into revenue they went bye.

 

[Captain Cranks]

I will say that the companies that did make it through the dot com bubble bursting were companies that did actually have revenue. The ones that didn’t already were complete speculation and aren’t around anymore. Of the FAANG crew only Amazon and Apple were public companies during the burst and they had revenues and were legit businesses even if unprofitable. I’ve often brought up search engines as an example that out of blockchain, the winner might be something that hasn’t happened yet. Google was way after all the early established search engines and now the rest of them are dust. Wouldn’t surprise me at all to see late entrants pap the field.

No one is dismissing any tech but Terra/Luna went from what $50B to nada and there was no impact outside of investors losing money. That’s what we mean in terms of no real tangible business. I get the metaverses/games because they aren’t really different from Fortnite, an entertainment business if you will.

I agree with many of the points you've made, but it would not be accurate to say that the current protocols aren't bringing in revenues or that they're not real tangible businesses. Let's take Ethereum, for example. Let's say I want to buy an NFT on a game built on Ethereum so that I'm allowed to take ownership of in-game assets. I need to purchase Ethereum, send it onto the network, and send it to the current owner of the NFT (whether that's the game protocol or another user). Ethereum charges a fee for that transfer. Part of the fee is sent to miners who validate the system while another part is burned. This burning mechanism is, in effect, a share buyback which increases the value of the remaining tokens. The more the network is used, the greater the transactions, the greater the share buybacks.  

 

[stbugs]

I agree with many of the points you've made, but it would not be accurate to say that the current protocols aren't bringing in revenues or that they're not real tangible businesses. Let's take Ethereum, for example. Let's say I want to buy an NFT-based game built on Ethereum so that I'm allowed to take ownership of in-game assets. I need to purchase Ethereum, send it onto the network, and send it to the current owner of the NFT (whether that's the game protocol or another user). Ethereum charges a fee for that transfer. Part of the fee is sent to miners who validate the system while another part is burned. This burning mechanism is, in effect, a share buyback which increases the value of the remaining tokens. The more the network is used, the greater the transactions, the greater the share buybacks.  

I agree on Ethereum. There’s tangible revenue streams and companies. Opensea makes a cut of sales similar to exchanges and miners making money. There are way more examples with 0 utility with rather large market caps like Luna. Just like the dot com bubble, I’d predict that most are gone not that long from now and that winners in this space could be things we haven’t even heard about.

 

[Captain Cranks]

When the internet came about it brought with it http / apis / xml / tcp/ip…all of the things we use today…the underlying structure of Web 2.0.  Blockchain and underlying tech of Web 3.0 with ETH and smart contracts is the same thing…there is no company per se. 

Right, but it's important to note that the protocols you mentioned were not designed for monetization. Web3 protocols are.

 

[jm192]

When the internet came about it brought with it http / apis / xml / tcp/ip…all of the things we use today…the underlying structure of Web 2.0.  Blockchain and underlying tech of Web 3.0 with ETH and smart contracts is the same thing…there is no company per se. 

Sure.  And I’m of the belief blockchain technology has value.  Smart contracts have valuable uses.  But http doesn’t make company.com valuable.  

 

 

[Captain Cranks]

I agree on Ethereum. There’s tangible revenue streams and companies. Opensea makes a cut of sales similar to exchanges and miners making money. There are way more examples with 0 utility with rather large market caps like Luna. Just like the dot com bubble, I’d predict that most are gone not that long from now and that winners in this space could be things we haven’t even heard about.

For sure. Ultimately there will only need to be a handful of layer 1 protocols with which everything else is built upon. Thus, a lot of the copycat and meme stuff will end up worthless.

 

[jm192]

I agree on Ethereum. There’s tangible revenue streams and companies. Opensea makes a cut of sales similar to exchanges and miners making money. There are way more examples with 0 utility with rather large market caps like Luna. Just like the dot com bubble, I’d predict that most are gone not that long from now and that winners in this space could be things we haven’t even heard about.

This is another concern.  Someone’s could win the crypto game.  But it may very well be something not even on existence

 

[FreeBaGeL]

 They can be used to infer or anticipate future revenue but they aren’t going to be measure value. That’s where the dot com bubble happened. Facebook’s revenue per user is way different than Pinterest’s. If Ask Jeeves wasn’t successful in turning eyeballs into revenue they went bye.

Not every asset is a stock.  Even stocks themselves are only measured by profit so long as the people that are clicking the "bid" button care about profits.  It's an artificial concept.  Now granted we can be as close to 100% sure as possible that people will continue caring about profit when buying stocks going forward, but there is no true guarantee.  10 years from now everyone could have decided profits are irrelevant to stock price.  There's nothing that says a stock's value has to be a measure of its profits.

And there's CERTAINLY nothing that says an asset's value has to be a measure of its profits.  Most assets aren't.  In that sense, stocks are actually the exception here, not the rule.  Your house doesn't generate any profits, but it has a value.  Gold doesn't generate profits, but it has a value.  A painting doesn't generate profits, but it can have value.

"Bitcoin" is not a company.  There are lots of investments that aren't companies.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This is another concern.  Someone’s could win the crypto game.  But it may very well be something not even on existence

Of course.  And someone could win the electric car game that isn't Tesla.  And someone could win the hydrogen power game that isn't Ballard.  And someone could win the digital signatures game that isn't Docusign.  Etc.

 

[jm192]

Of course.  And someone could win the electric car game that isn't Tesla.  And someone could win the hydrogen power game that isn't Ballard.  And someone could win the digital signatures game that isn't Docusign.  Etc.

Sure.  
 

I’m not actively investing in electric cars or Hydrogen or digital signatures.  All those companies could certainly disappear.  
 

But if Tesla becomes #2 or 3, they’ll still generate revenue.  
 

If a newer better Bitcoin comes out, what does Bitcoin do to “matter?”  

 

[FreeBaGeL]

If a newer better Bitcoin comes out, what does Bitcoin do to “matter?”  

There is nothing that says there will be only one blockchain network forever.  There are a lot more than one right now.  When the dust settles maybe there will be one.  Maybe none.  Maybe two.  Maybe ten.  Who knows how many we'll end up using.  There is more than one precious metal.  More than one internet company.  More than one real estate trust.

But yes, even if blockchain ends up being a big part of the future maybe it won't be bitcoin.  Who knows.  There's no guarantee Tesla will be a part of the electric cars future either.  This risk exists in everything.  The whole example that started this discussion about "what if it's a different blockchain than bitcoin" was in referencing dot com companies that lost out so badly they no longer exist, so the goalposts are getting shifted around a bit here.  Those losers weren't just second best that carried on making good money into perpetuity.

 

[Dan Lambskin]

When moon?

 

[KGB]

When moon?

all out of moons today

 

[KGB]

all out of moons today

Still sold out

 

[KGB]

Moved my PLSX (Down) into HEX (down more)

cashed out a few stragglers ad am in HEX @ $.38

actually. decided im out for now.  USDC until further notice. 

 

[Terminalxylem]

Right because me getting a few people on a message board to buy a few thousand worth of bitcoin is really gonna pump that price!!  Please more accurate with your words.  I'm not pushing "CrYpTO" I'm trying to educate y'all on bitcoin.  And I'm spreading knowledge and encouraging people to learn about this genius monetary invention.  Why?  I want humanity to thrive in the future and clean/honest/perfect money is the way to achieve that.  Bitcoin fixes a lot of things. It's very profound. I suggest you start learning about it ASAP.

What problems does Bitcoin solve, that other cryptocurrencies do not? 

Assuming conventional currency goes the way of the dodo, how will Bitcoin outcompete whatever electronic money our government adopts?

Also, isn’t blockchain the revolutionary technology, and Bitcoin a product thereof?

 

[fruity pebbles]

No dog in this fight but bitcoin is gonna cut right through the 20s.

 

[GreenNGold]

Also, isn’t blockchain the revolutionary technology, and Bitcoin a product thereof?

No, not at all, blockchain is completely inefficient and inferior technology compared to what already exists, but people are willing to sacrifice efficiency for the decentralized nature of bitcoin (but that does come at an incredible expense). 

 

[ren hoek]

Holy hell what did I miss?  Im lovin this and starting to get fomo lol 

My goal for a while has been to become a 100K BATionnaire and it looks very close.  I haven’t seen it under .30 for a solid minute 

 

[Captain Cranks]

No, not at all, blockchain is completely inefficient and inferior technology compared to what already exists, but people are willing to sacrifice efficiency for the decentralized nature of bitcoin (but that does come at an incredible expense). 

Huh?  Our current financial system is efficient?

 

[GreenNGold]

Huh?  Our current financial system is efficient?

Yes, extremely. 

 

[Desert_Power]

Glad I never put money in Celcius

 

[Capella]

I truly cannot believe people dump like their life savings into this stuff. Hard for me to fathom. What Celsius just did is unbelievable. 

 

[stbugs]

I truly cannot believe people dump like their life savings into this stuff. Hard for me to fathom. What Celsius just did is unbelievable. 

Holy cow. Are they kind of an exchange like Binance or Coinbase? Pausing withdrawals is big news. Might be a lot more shoes to drop like this.

 

[Desert_Power]

I don't have a lot of crypto and it is mostly just stablecoins, but certainly pulling it out of any "earn" status back to USD.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

No, not at all, blockchain is completely inefficient and inferior technology compared to what already exists, but people are willing to sacrifice efficiency for the decentralized nature of bitcoin (but that does come at an incredible expense). 

I pay one of my business contacts through Zelle, which is supposed to be banks being hip with the future.  Today I got a notice that the bank had disconnected my enrollment in Zelle.  I don't even know what that means.  I tried to re-enroll and it said I was already enrolled for that email.  Paying people on Zelle is hilarious, they don't know if it goes through their email or phone number and if they give you the wrong one the money just disappears.  It's a mess.

My business is real estate.  When I buy a property I have to pay someone $2000 to verify that the title was transferred to the prior owner from me.  A document in some office is signed and someone gets $2000 to be a witness.  And the bank wants every document imaginable to issue a loan and that takes 30 days and comes with all kinds of fees.  Then the deed is a piece of paper that I could probably replicate on a printer, with a copy stored in an office somewhere that no one really knows where it is.

If I want to start a real estate fund I pay thousands in lawyer fees.  Everyone that joins the fund has their money locked up for years, until I pay them out, with no way to transfer that investment share they own if they need liquidity or if the value increases.  Trying to get any of that out without me issuing it will cost them thousands in lawyer fees even in a best case scenario.

All of this stuff takes 5 seconds, and is nearly free, on the blockchain.

 

[ren hoek]

Glad I never put money in Celcius

I had a ton of money in at one point.  I got it all out early last year though, after they pulled some bushleague #### with promo codes.  Just seemed like a deal where the new investors could easily be frontloading the yields for regular users.  Their business model didn't make much sense after so long 

 

[KGB]

I had a ton of money in at one point.  I got it all out early last year though, after they pulled some bushleague #### with promo codes.  Just seemed like a deal where the new investors could easily be frontloading the yields for regular users.  Their business model didn't make much sense after so long 

glad you got out buddy.

CEL

USDT

Confirmed baddies?

 

[KGB]

Not sure about others.....

But I consider coins as gambling.  Not that theres anything wrong with that.  But thats my stance.

I may have moved all my stock money to crypto, but it was my gambling stock money, not my going to retire money.

its my I hope to retire tomorrow money.  just fyi for anyone that looks at what I post....

I also think investing in the stock market is gambling though.  in general.  it goes through big upswings where we all thinkk were the man, but if you look in the stock thread, even those who are the smartest are getting killed

 

[KGB]

and the reason I moved my gambling stock money to crypto is because a great year in stocks in like 50-300%

thats nothing in crypto.  and if im gonna gamble, I wanna win big 

Edit, current best gamble has been 2K to 50K (HEX) beat that with a stock

 

[ren hoek]

glad you got out buddy.

CEL

USDT

Confirmed baddies?

I'd definitely agree

My big concern now is what to do with money I have tied up on Uphold (gold/silver), and all the PAXG (erc-20 token on eth tied to price of gold, apparently insured by London Good Delivery) I have.  It's my life savings basically.  Now I'm sitting here wondering how solvent any of these things would be in the event of a major crypto crash.  

Ironically enough I'm not worried about my BAT holdings.  I just want the stuff I've gone to great lengths to ensure stays valuable and a hedge against inflation is safe.  

 

[KGB]

I'd definitely agree

My big concern now is what to do with money I have tied up on Uphold (gold/silver), and all the PAXG (erc-20 token on eth tied to price of gold, apparently insured by London Good Delivery) I have.  It's my life savings basically.  Now I'm sitting here wondering how solvent any of these things would be in the event of a major crypto crash.  

Ironically enough I'm not worried about my BAT holdings.  I just want the stuff I've gone to great lengths to ensure stays valuable and a hedge against inflation is safe.  

I only know you from killing me in GOW   ahahahhaha

But, I think everything keeps going down a bit.  no idea about gold silver, maybe thats the opposite.  but stocks and crypto for sure.

BTC as of today is $26040.55

I bet it goes under 20K and will drag everything crypto with it.  JMO

EDIT- life saving, put it on the sideline for now.  but again, I know nothing about gold silver.  but in the stuff im in.  im on the sideline for a bit

 

[KGB]

$2K to 1MM update....

Down to $93K

Down to $50K