Except for drafting Gates. You should always do that.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) debacle with FTX (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
timschochet
Footballguy
Putting aside the apparent corruption implicit in this particular scheme, it seems to me that a good rule in life is that you can NEVER make money by following the crowd. If too many people are doing something to make money, then you can be pretty sure that whatever money there is has already been made. By the time you hear about it, there’s nothing in it for you.
timschochet
Footballguy
ETA- see the gold rush.
General Malaise
Footballguy
Was there ever a way to short the crypto movement?
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Oh, yeah. With 20X leverage too.
General Malaise
Footballguy
Beginning to think the only people who made money in this were the folks selling the picks and the shovels. History. It may not repeat, but it always rhymes.
TLEF316
Footballguy
This certainly might be true, but the people driving this revolution certainly aren't doing the technology any favors. For people like me, who know very little about it, its basically just criminal enterprises like FTX and online cartoon pictures of monkeys that some bro tells us are worth $500,000.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Now do NFTs
Runkle
Footballguy
Crypto "investing" is basically just a bunch of people trading money around in a big circle. All the profit is made in the fees, when the money gets taken off the table.
Dickies
Footballguy
The problem I see is that at least with the dot-com bubble people were investing in companies that were putting out a product. They hadn’t figured out how to turn profits (like Amazon back then), but people were betting on the potential. Sure there were pump and dumps and greedy people on both sides, but when it comes to crypto there is no real product. For 99% of crypto projects it’s about getting in before the pump and getting out before the dump. I try to follow this stuff because I find it fascinating and it felt like I was reading about new rug pulls daily. It feels like the wild wild west where criminals can repeatedly scam people with zero repercussions.
I was recently “gifted” a free NFT avatar on Reddit, which I then heard had some value and could be sold. I had no idea what I was doing, but decided I was going to try selling it. I had to set up multiple wallets in order to transfer the NFT and have a landing spot for the sale proceeds. Once I thought I was ready to sell I learned I had to pay a fee in crypto to sell the NFT. Of course I was also charged a fee in dollars to buy the crypto. The NFT sold pretty quickly as I priced it on the lower end of the spectrum. Once it sold I had a different crypto in my wallet. Now to convert this to real money I had to create an account with an exchange, so I opened an account with Coinbase. Turns out the crypto in my wallet isn’t supported by Coinbase, so I had to figure out how to convert this new crypto into a different crypto, which I did (forget if there was another fee for this). I finally get it converted into a token Coinbase will accept and go to transfer…. Only to find out that I need some of this crypto on the Coinbase side of the equation to pay the fee. I buy some more of this crypto, incurring a real $ fee to do so, so that I can pay the fee to transfer. Once everything was transferred I paid another fee to Coinbase to convert to USD, and finally got the money in my checking account. I forget if there was a fee for this. I ended up clearing $230.
The process was eye opening to me. It’s so convoluted and took forever. Transferring the crypto from wallet to wallet took around 15 minutes per transaction, which kills any potential use as an actual currency IMO. The fees involved in every aspect of the process would make Wells Fargo salivate.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
No doubt the headlines are far from flattering. I imagine what most people read or hear is about speculative gains or losses, silly jpegs, and scams. Underneath the surface, however, are the biggest brains in Silicon Valley and around the world working on a technology that will likely change how humankind operates. You don't hear about that because it's doesn't draw eyeballs.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
That's not really true. Protocols like Ethereum provide a service. They allow the transfer of value from one party to another without the need for a middleman. They charge a fee based on each transaction. Many other protocols provide similar services. Are there a ton of copycat **** coins whose only real purposes is speculation? Sure. But there are many projects that provide solutions to real world problems.
ETA - Another example. Bitcoin allows you to transfer millions or even billions of dollars to anyone in the world at the speed of light, minimal fees, and no middleman. You can't do that anywhere else.
Capella
Footballguy
Millions and billions of dollars get transferred literally every day.
The Z Machine
Footballguy
What is the value proposition that crypto / blockchain will provide?
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Yep. The technology has a long way to go before it's efficient and user friendly. Slowly but surely people will be using blockchain technology without even knowing it, but for right now we have experiences like yours.
SWC
Bromigo
mostly by the best industry there is the banking industry take that to the bank brohans
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
You left out the important parts.
Dickies
Footballguy
I can transfer money to people via traditional methods with no fee.
Capella
Footballguy
Wire transfers are close to the speed of light and I’d rather pay a 35 dollar transfer fee than have my entire bankroll scammed away from me by 29 year old muppet character. Jmo
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Blockchain technology hypothetically solves problems that either don’t exist or could be fixed cheaper by other means.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
What do you mean by "value proposition"?
Perhaps if I assume you mean what benefits or services can it provide I'll answer your question. Here are a few real world problems blockchain can solve.
1. Allow the world's bankless to store and transfer financial assets. An estimated 1.4 billion adults around the world do not have access to the traditional banking system. They are unable to take it to the bank @SWC
2. Digital Identification - An estimated 1.1 billion people in the world don't have an ability to claim ownership over their identities. Consensys
3. Transfer of assets without middle man - Already explained above.
4. Allow ownership and transferability of assets. How many have poured hundreds of dollars into Epic Games so their kids can buy Fortnite skins? After a day, they're useless. NFTs would allow you or your child to sell those skins to others.
5. Fractionalization of high end assets- Not many are able to afford a Van Gough painting or condo in Manhattan. We may be able to afford 1/1000th of those items though.
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Footballguy
This sounds like every place I’ve ever worked. It’s like I’m living in an entirely different world or these people are just pretending so the gravy train keeps going.
TLEF316
Footballguy
Yeah, this is where I'm at too.
Is there a CHANCE that some day Bank of America (and the entities that they work with to transfer $$) have issues or someone goes rogue and my money somehow becomes compromised? I guess. But that's why we have stuff like the FDIC, is it not?
I'll gladly take that risk over whatever the hell the perfect, pure implementation of block chain tech looks like.
This whole thing really just looks like something people are trying to force into existence (solving a problem that doesn't need solving) because a % of the public has been convinced that Goldman Sachs and the coastal banking elites are all somehow out to steal the $5,000 in their checking account.
Dickies
Footballguy
You think the people who are bankless are going to get smart phones, create wallets, and sign up for crypto exchange services?
The Big Donkey
Footballguy
FTX executive Ryan Salame flipped on Sam Bankman-Fried, filings show
Ryan Salame contacted Bahamian officials two days before FTX collapsed into bankruptcy, according to court filings.
nypost.com
The Z Machine
Footballguy
To be fair, I think there are a lot of unbanked people that have mobile phones and data plans.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
The estimated % of banked people in the world is 66%. The estimated % of people with smartphones is 83%. Do I think that 17% will create wallets and self custody their assets if given the opportunity? Yes. Especially if it means transferring their assets from hyperinflating currencies.
Most of us are lucky enough to live in the richest country in the world whose currency isn't being hyperinflated by corrupt governments and we have easy access to traditional banking. Not everyone is so lucky.
SWC
Bromigo
the fact that nearly 1 and a half billion people do not have access to a bank is something that the un and multiple charities should be addressing every day before we even worry about global warming take that to the bank brohans
The governments of the world aren’t going let an untraceable, unregulated currency replacement take a significant share of the market. This seems to be the dominant use case from crypto proponents but IMO it is a pipe dream.
coopersdad
Footballguy
$230 profit on a gift, which seems pretty good, but you got a "taste" and if you're not financially responsible, pretty soon that taste becomes and addition, and soon you have your pockets turned inside out with a meme of "WTF"
Dickies
Footballguy
I'm not sure it was adequate compensation for my time and aggravation.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
If I'm going to invest $10,000 in the stock market, I might as well throw $1000 into crypto. Maybe bitcoin will go to $1M. I've done dumber things with my money in Vegas.
Desert_Power
Footballguy
I'm not sure blockchain technology itself solves any of those problems. Most of these aren't technology problems to begin with, but policy choices that someone has made.
As an example, people aren't bankless because of technology. They are bankless because they can't afford the fees banks charge poor people. If Bitcoin implemented a policy charging monthly fees, those same people wouldn't be able to use Bitcoin either. In the reverse, if Wells Fargo stopped charging monthly fees, anyone could afford a Wells Fargo account.
In short, blockchain technology isn't solving these problems. Some people have decided to tackle certain policy issues and have, coincidentally, chosen blockchain technology as their engine.
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Not if it goes on to replace the traditional banking system. Annual Bitcoin energy consumption is less than the consumption of Christmas lights. Which do you say has less utility?
Going back to agendas, the oil and gas industry has spent billions campaigning to fight renewables. The banking industry will do the same with headline grabbers like the one you cited.
The world is a-changing and some have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Desert_Power
Footballguy
I think both of these have pretty low utility.
DA RAIDERS
Footballguy
golfclap
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Right now? Bitcoin. Unless you're laundering money or trying to do some scams.
Sand
Footballguy
She's got some high end lawyers and is almost certainly cutting a deal. I doubt she escapes completely, though. I also expect the others, i.e. the ones in on the wirefraud chat system, will also go down at some point.
The dude who blew the whistle prior to the collapse may get off, though. Great timing on his part.
Capella
Footballguy
Bitcoin
Tom Hagen
Footballguy
Thats a huge red flag to me. Public accounting has been talking about blockchain and crypto from the very beginning and the Big 4 firms have a pretty good idea of how to audit it.
PwC crypto center
The Big Donkey
Footballguy
Mazars Group suspends all work with crypto clients including Binance, Crypto.com, citing concerns over public perception of proof of reserves
Accounting firm Mazars Group has suspended all work with its crypto clients, according to its former client and the world's largest crypto exchange, Binance.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
@'ing some folks instead of a big quote blob.
@TLEF316 @massraider @The Z Machine @Runkle @Juxtatarot @STEADYMOBBIN 22 @thecatch @Desert_Power
I'm not here to be some crypto bro. I do play around with that stuff just like I sometimes Yolo RIVN calls in the stock thread, but that's play money. I do believe the blockchain is revolutionary technology that will make the world better for all of us. This post will be long as heck (long enough I have to split it into two posts), so hopefully it still gets read.
I can already transfer money for free
Transferring money is not free. Storing money is not free. There are fees associated with all of it, there is just another company (typically a bank) offering it as a "free" service in exchange for making LOADS of money off of you, and more importantly requiring you to cede control of your own assets. Venmo or Paypal, for example, can freeze your account at any time and hold the money into it for weeks or months, and this happens often.
The irony of the FTX debacle is that it is a perfect example of why we need crypto/blockchain, even though it's being used as a strike in the opposite.
FTX was basically operating as a bank. They were custodying other people's assets and using it to invest in other people's stuff so they could make money off of other people's money. The huge difference was that they were unregulated and uninsured. Plenty of banks failed as those regulations (and eventually the requirement of FDIC insurance, which has existed for less than 100 years) forced banks to work, with a bunch of those band-aids slapped on. Blockchain money will eventually be regulated too, as is necessary for trust and adoption.
Banks exist for consumers because it is not feasible or secure to store $250k in dollar bills under your mattress. So instead we give it to a bank, who now holds the money, makes money off of it, and controls our access to it. In practice, with 200 years of advancing regulations and insurance requirements we have pretty reliable access to it. But not total access, and that's only with a lot of band-aids attached to kind of force it to work so every bank doesn't end up just doing the same thing as FTX. I still signed up for a Wells Fargo business account recently, decided I didn't like it, and was told that as a new customer I can only withdraw $6000/mo via ACH. I still have to wait however long the bank decides to make me wait when transfering it. There are still rules, set by other people, for how I can access my own money.
Here's a crude meme I've seen about FTX
Satoshi: Here's a technology so you no longer have to give your money to trusted 3rd parties
People: Gives their money to trusted 3rd party
Trusted 3rd party: Takes the money
Satoshi: ...
The point here is if I have $250k and money worked on the blockchain, I could hold it myself all the time, securely. In my pocket, if I wanted to, with no risk of misplacing it, but not requiring anyone else to hold it for me.
And of course, if you're one of those that considers what "your" tax dollars are spent on, $498 billion in bailouts after 2008 from our tax dollars was certainly not free.
Crypto wallets are convoluted, slow, and have a lot of fees
As per @Dickies example above, this stuff can be daunting at first. But this is still a new and maturing technology. It's only been VERY recent that it's gotten enough traction that there was actually incentive for developers to make things easy. Further complicating things is that there is no standard of currency yet, which is what really makes things complicated. What dickies went through was essentially the crypto version of Forex. Like in current currency terms if I told him I wanted to buy his baseball card but I was going to pay him in Bostwanan Pula, it's not going to be a 5 second affair for him to take that and go buy a Gatorade at the corner store with it.
That's kind of where we still are with crypto. Thousands of currencies, and no one's settled on one yet, so we have to constantly convert them. If we had a digital USD on the blockchain, the majority of that complexity goes away.
And that's kind of the same answer for transaction speed, fees, etc. Back before crypto bros yolo'ing into coins with a cool name, the reason people speculated on crypto currencies was because they were trying to predict which one was best and was more likely to be adopted. Some are faster, near instant. Some have lower fees, fractions of a penny per transaction. Some are more climate friendly. Capitalism dictates that eventually we're likely to get the best of all of these, as insanely huge strides are made in these daily. For instance Ethereum just completed the merge to proof of stake, which reduced its energy consumption by 99.6%. Transaction speed would solve itself if any currency were adopted, because one of the benefits of proof of stake is that YOU earn the fees instead of banks, so the whole world would be staking their crypto (you're getting paid just to hold your own money) and the network would be so massive that transactions would be instant.
NFTS are just dumb ape pictures though with no use case
NFTs are just items on the blockchain. A common example I always give as a real estate guy is..
When I buy a house, I pay thousands in title insurance to verify it's clean, verify that it's transfered, we pay someone to transfer the deed, the deed is held somewhere, who even knows. If the deed were an NFT, it would all be automatically verified by the blockchain, instantly transfered for pennies instead of thousands, and I could have it on me any time I want, securely.
If I were looking to buy a rental property with investors I could create 10 NFTs that represents the deal. Each NFT represents 10% ownership in the house. When rent is paid on the house, it splits it up into 1/10ths and airdrops that amount into each account that holds the NFT. This can be done in a convoluted manner with contracts now, but there's no asset that represents it. With an NFT, if @Capella wanted to sell his 10% share because he needs a chunk of cash, he simply sells his NFT to @SWC and now automatically, with no expensive lawyers involved, SWC is taking that 1/10th rent payment to the bank every month as the airdrop now occurs in his wallet, since his wallet now owns the NFT.
Further, unlike a traditional deal with contracts and whatnot, that NFT can increase or decrease in value based on how the home is performing. If the rent goes up or the house appreciates then that NFT can likely be sold for more than it was originally purchased for. Now there's an open market for something that previously could not be represented as an asset.
This is just with NFTs being a few years old. The use cases for being able to digitize anything and make it a saleable, tradeable good are endless and most of them we haven't even thought of yet. When the internet came about no even dreamed up the idea of Spotify/Netflix as a future use case yet.
Think back to the famous interview where Bill Gates explained the internet use case to David Letterman. He said you could stream a baseball game on it. Letterman, to thunderous applause and laughter, mocked the idea because we could already do that on the radio. Couldn't even imagine in his wildest dreams how the internet would one day change the way we are able to access sports or music.
@TLEF316 @massraider @The Z Machine @Runkle @Juxtatarot @STEADYMOBBIN 22 @thecatch @Desert_Power
I'm not here to be some crypto bro. I do play around with that stuff just like I sometimes Yolo RIVN calls in the stock thread, but that's play money. I do believe the blockchain is revolutionary technology that will make the world better for all of us. This post will be long as heck (long enough I have to split it into two posts), so hopefully it still gets read.
I can already transfer money for free
Transferring money is not free. Storing money is not free. There are fees associated with all of it, there is just another company (typically a bank) offering it as a "free" service in exchange for making LOADS of money off of you, and more importantly requiring you to cede control of your own assets. Venmo or Paypal, for example, can freeze your account at any time and hold the money into it for weeks or months, and this happens often.
The irony of the FTX debacle is that it is a perfect example of why we need crypto/blockchain, even though it's being used as a strike in the opposite.
FTX was basically operating as a bank. They were custodying other people's assets and using it to invest in other people's stuff so they could make money off of other people's money. The huge difference was that they were unregulated and uninsured. Plenty of banks failed as those regulations (and eventually the requirement of FDIC insurance, which has existed for less than 100 years) forced banks to work, with a bunch of those band-aids slapped on. Blockchain money will eventually be regulated too, as is necessary for trust and adoption.
Banks exist for consumers because it is not feasible or secure to store $250k in dollar bills under your mattress. So instead we give it to a bank, who now holds the money, makes money off of it, and controls our access to it. In practice, with 200 years of advancing regulations and insurance requirements we have pretty reliable access to it. But not total access, and that's only with a lot of band-aids attached to kind of force it to work so every bank doesn't end up just doing the same thing as FTX. I still signed up for a Wells Fargo business account recently, decided I didn't like it, and was told that as a new customer I can only withdraw $6000/mo via ACH. I still have to wait however long the bank decides to make me wait when transfering it. There are still rules, set by other people, for how I can access my own money.
Here's a crude meme I've seen about FTX
Satoshi: Here's a technology so you no longer have to give your money to trusted 3rd parties
People: Gives their money to trusted 3rd party
Trusted 3rd party: Takes the money
Satoshi: ...
The point here is if I have $250k and money worked on the blockchain, I could hold it myself all the time, securely. In my pocket, if I wanted to, with no risk of misplacing it, but not requiring anyone else to hold it for me.
And of course, if you're one of those that considers what "your" tax dollars are spent on, $498 billion in bailouts after 2008 from our tax dollars was certainly not free.
Crypto wallets are convoluted, slow, and have a lot of fees
As per @Dickies example above, this stuff can be daunting at first. But this is still a new and maturing technology. It's only been VERY recent that it's gotten enough traction that there was actually incentive for developers to make things easy. Further complicating things is that there is no standard of currency yet, which is what really makes things complicated. What dickies went through was essentially the crypto version of Forex. Like in current currency terms if I told him I wanted to buy his baseball card but I was going to pay him in Bostwanan Pula, it's not going to be a 5 second affair for him to take that and go buy a Gatorade at the corner store with it.
That's kind of where we still are with crypto. Thousands of currencies, and no one's settled on one yet, so we have to constantly convert them. If we had a digital USD on the blockchain, the majority of that complexity goes away.
And that's kind of the same answer for transaction speed, fees, etc. Back before crypto bros yolo'ing into coins with a cool name, the reason people speculated on crypto currencies was because they were trying to predict which one was best and was more likely to be adopted. Some are faster, near instant. Some have lower fees, fractions of a penny per transaction. Some are more climate friendly. Capitalism dictates that eventually we're likely to get the best of all of these, as insanely huge strides are made in these daily. For instance Ethereum just completed the merge to proof of stake, which reduced its energy consumption by 99.6%. Transaction speed would solve itself if any currency were adopted, because one of the benefits of proof of stake is that YOU earn the fees instead of banks, so the whole world would be staking their crypto (you're getting paid just to hold your own money) and the network would be so massive that transactions would be instant.
NFTS are just dumb ape pictures though with no use case
NFTs are just items on the blockchain. A common example I always give as a real estate guy is..
When I buy a house, I pay thousands in title insurance to verify it's clean, verify that it's transfered, we pay someone to transfer the deed, the deed is held somewhere, who even knows. If the deed were an NFT, it would all be automatically verified by the blockchain, instantly transfered for pennies instead of thousands, and I could have it on me any time I want, securely.
If I were looking to buy a rental property with investors I could create 10 NFTs that represents the deal. Each NFT represents 10% ownership in the house. When rent is paid on the house, it splits it up into 1/10ths and airdrops that amount into each account that holds the NFT. This can be done in a convoluted manner with contracts now, but there's no asset that represents it. With an NFT, if @Capella wanted to sell his 10% share because he needs a chunk of cash, he simply sells his NFT to @SWC and now automatically, with no expensive lawyers involved, SWC is taking that 1/10th rent payment to the bank every month as the airdrop now occurs in his wallet, since his wallet now owns the NFT.
Further, unlike a traditional deal with contracts and whatnot, that NFT can increase or decrease in value based on how the home is performing. If the rent goes up or the house appreciates then that NFT can likely be sold for more than it was originally purchased for. Now there's an open market for something that previously could not be represented as an asset.
This is just with NFTs being a few years old. The use cases for being able to digitize anything and make it a saleable, tradeable good are endless and most of them we haven't even thought of yet. When the internet came about no even dreamed up the idea of Spotify/Netflix as a future use case yet.
Think back to the famous interview where Bill Gates explained the internet use case to David Letterman. He said you could stream a baseball game on it. Letterman, to thunderous applause and laughter, mocked the idea because we could already do that on the radio. Couldn't even imagine in his wildest dreams how the internet would one day change the way we are able to access sports or music.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Crypto uses tons of energy and contributes to climate change
Proof of work crypto currencies do. Proof of stake currencies use far less. Ethereum recently moved from PoW to PoS and lowered its energy usage by 99%. Of course, none of this is accounting for the energy usage of the banking industry, which is far higher than even bitcoin, and would become far less necessary with blockchain adoption.
The blockchain operating alongside our current monetary system is a waste of energy. The blockchain being adopted into our current monetary system saves energy.
A global unregulated currency is crazy
I agree. The idea of governments relinquishing any control of their currency died long ago. But things like digital currency and NFTs can operate within the bounds of our current society. A digital USD operated on the blockchain would be amazing.
And of course USD is ALREADY digital. When you transfer 50k from Chase to US Bank, they don't literally ship them 50k in dollar bills. It's just a transaction, digitally recorded by Chase as a sender, and digitally recorded by US bank as a recipient. That's exactly what the blockchain does, publicly, automatically, and without having to take hold of your money to do it.
Even paper money at this point is nothing more than a receipt verifying that when someone hands me $10, they have $10 less and I have $10 more. This is all just the blockchain, but having to give up money and control of your own assets to do it.
Blockchain doesn't have to mean we delete banks tomorrow. Blockchain can work alongside banks for decades or forever. When the internet came along we didn't just blow up all the libraries, burn the encyclopedias, destroy the physical VHS tapes and CDs, etc overnight. People could still use that stuff, while folks on the cutting edge focused more on the digital versions of those things, and overtime the latter grew while the former shrank until the people now using the internet grew up with it, and are so integrated into it that they barely understand what came before it. Blockchain adoption would have to be the same, where someone who is 60 years old and once thought closing their Netscape browser was them accidentally deleting the internet from their computer can still use banks for the next 20 years or longer. But with the option to self custody there, regulated and supported by the government, more and more people would shift in that direction until eventually it was the norm.
Proof of work crypto currencies do. Proof of stake currencies use far less. Ethereum recently moved from PoW to PoS and lowered its energy usage by 99%. Of course, none of this is accounting for the energy usage of the banking industry, which is far higher than even bitcoin, and would become far less necessary with blockchain adoption.
The blockchain operating alongside our current monetary system is a waste of energy. The blockchain being adopted into our current monetary system saves energy.
A global unregulated currency is crazy
I agree. The idea of governments relinquishing any control of their currency died long ago. But things like digital currency and NFTs can operate within the bounds of our current society. A digital USD operated on the blockchain would be amazing.
And of course USD is ALREADY digital. When you transfer 50k from Chase to US Bank, they don't literally ship them 50k in dollar bills. It's just a transaction, digitally recorded by Chase as a sender, and digitally recorded by US bank as a recipient. That's exactly what the blockchain does, publicly, automatically, and without having to take hold of your money to do it.
Even paper money at this point is nothing more than a receipt verifying that when someone hands me $10, they have $10 less and I have $10 more. This is all just the blockchain, but having to give up money and control of your own assets to do it.
Blockchain doesn't have to mean we delete banks tomorrow. Blockchain can work alongside banks for decades or forever. When the internet came along we didn't just blow up all the libraries, burn the encyclopedias, destroy the physical VHS tapes and CDs, etc overnight. People could still use that stuff, while folks on the cutting edge focused more on the digital versions of those things, and overtime the latter grew while the former shrank until the people now using the internet grew up with it, and are so integrated into it that they barely understand what came before it. Blockchain adoption would have to be the same, where someone who is 60 years old and once thought closing their Netscape browser was them accidentally deleting the internet from their computer can still use banks for the next 20 years or longer. But with the option to self custody there, regulated and supported by the government, more and more people would shift in that direction until eventually it was the norm.
Last edited:
Captain Cranks
Footballguy
Bravo, @FreeBaGeL
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
Those percentage assumptions seem wildly inflated, IMO
The Z Machine
Footballguy
Good writeup, @FreeBaGeL. Thanks for posting. Not gonna lie, I didn't have time to read all of it.
If successful crypto adoption requires governments to set regulations and insurance requirements (like banks), then isn't it nearly the same as USD? Also, there's risk in keeping your assets in a cold crypto wallet, namely, what happens if you mess up your "crypto seed" and are locked out of your wallet forever? What happens if you pass away and only you know your seed? If you write it down, that can be stolen, right? Why would I take these risks if I could just put my money in an FDIC insured bank and pay a little extra and not have to worry about technology or seed words or any of that stuff?
Finally, there will always be contract and lawsuits and such on fractionally divided assets. No amount of blockchain or technology is going to prevent people from hiring lawyers to file a cease and desist or other injunction on another party. I am 100% convinced that the only career that will not be replaced by AI will be lawyers because they will write laws that insure that they always get paid.
If successful crypto adoption requires governments to set regulations and insurance requirements (like banks), then isn't it nearly the same as USD? Also, there's risk in keeping your assets in a cold crypto wallet, namely, what happens if you mess up your "crypto seed" and are locked out of your wallet forever? What happens if you pass away and only you know your seed? If you write it down, that can be stolen, right? Why would I take these risks if I could just put my money in an FDIC insured bank and pay a little extra and not have to worry about technology or seed words or any of that stuff?
Finally, there will always be contract and lawsuits and such on fractionally divided assets. No amount of blockchain or technology is going to prevent people from hiring lawyers to file a cease and desist or other injunction on another party. I am 100% convinced that the only career that will not be replaced by AI will be lawyers because they will write laws that insure that they always get paid.
Tom Hagen
Footballguy
I am far from an expert, but everything you posted makes sense to me in relation to blockhain/crypto as a currency or store of value. I agree there is a lot of potential utility there.
The problem IMO is that the majority of people have been conditioned to view crypto as speculative assets. I would never trust crypto as a method of payment as long as there are such wild fluctuations in price. To me it's like holding currency in a country that is in the middle of a violent coup, it's too unpredictable. At this point, I don't know how you stabilize the value to a reasonable fluctuation that non-speculators are comfortable with.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
I prefer to give my money to trusted third parties (with proper government oversight). I can deal with an inconvenience once in a blue moon.
