7 ms·

Even better: being able to create money out of thin air…oh wait.

by coralreef 4y ago

traveler01 4y ago
Isn't that what the federal reserve is being doing for the last decades?
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  I know ... just let anyone act like the federal reserve for fun and profit. 12,000 cryptocurrencies and "stable coins" later (the number doubled over the last year) --- does anyone really feel like the problem has been fixed?
  - coralreef 4y ago
    Just because you can clone Facebook doesn’t mean you get a valuable user base
    - jqpabc123 4y ago
      Crypto is much easier to clone than Facebook --- as evidenced by the fact they are multiplying like rabbits. The only thing restraining the creation of crypto is the fact that it is virtually unusable as an actual currency. If it were otherwise, every celebrity, politician and corporation would just mint their own continuous stream of the stuff. There is nothing to stop them. Productive work would become obsolete. Why work to "earn" money when you can just mint it? A lot of life's major problems could be solved instantly by crypto. If you buy this, I've got some crypto to sell you.
      - coralreef 4y ago
        Creating something doesn’t automatically make it valuable. You’re failing to realize that value is socially derived.
        jqpabc123 4y ago
        You’re failing to realize that value is socially derived. You're failing to realize that lots of people/companies have a larger social presence than Satoshi Nakamoto and are thus in a much stronger position to derive value from their own crypto. But most of these have had the good sense thus far to avoid crypto scams due to the potential legal issues. Kim Kardashian being one example of a prominent exception. https://decrypt.co/106533/kim-kardashian-ethereum-max-dismiss-lawsuit https://decrypt.co/106533/kim-kardashian-ethereum-max-dismis...
        coralreef 4y ago
        Corporations generally avoid creating cryptocurrencies because of the immense regulation and legal work they would have to do. And because banking regulation and compliance is generally out of their wheelhouse. Facebook tried it with their fiat basket backed stable coin.
        jqpabc123 4y ago
        Crypto isn't regulated at the current time --- at least not in the USA. However, the fact it isn't regulated doesn't mean they can't be sued in civil court for running a scam. This is what they are really afraid of --- see Kim Kardashian for an example. This is why crypto bros tend to hide their identify (Satoshi) or re-locate outside the USA and go into hiding once the scam collapses (the guys from 3AC). BOTTOM LINE: Selling electrons as money from your momma's basement is a shady business in more ways than one. Participate at your own risk.
- ProllyInfamous 4y ago
  ...as well as any/all US Chartered banks/FCUs. See "Fractional Reserve Banking." Fidelis in Numeris
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    See "stable coins" --- particularly Tether which underpins more than half of all crypto trades. It's "fractional reserve banking" --- only worse --- minus any accountability or guarantee of solvency. Crypto solves all the problems of the Federal Reserve and banking --- simply by mimicing it for fun and profit. If you buy that, I've got some crypto to sell you.
- As_You_Wish 4y ago
  Yes, but at least greenbacks are backed by real stuff. Backed by the USA, all the millions of workers, the US military, goods being produced, etc. Can a national currency be wiped out? Sure, through mismanagement. BUT, that does not negate the fact that the US dollar is backed by a whole lot of actual assets. Crypto is backed by nothing. Nothing.
  - coralreef 4y ago
    You misuse the word “backed”. The US economy does not “back” the dollar, figuratively or literally. America, it’s workers, corporations, military, etc., will happily abandon the dollar should it become necessary. No one wants to be paid in money undergoing massive devaluation.
    - As_You_Wish 4y ago
      I'm not misusing the word "backed." I'm assuming some sophistication from the reader. And to that point, it is true that nothing backs the dollar, but nothing backs nothing if you go down that road. In past times, when, let's say a city was being attacked and there's a seige, and food runs out, people will sell their $500,000 diamond ring for a potato, so diamonds and gold have no value as compared to a potato. However, if a meteor like the one that hit the earth 65 million years ago and wiped out the dinosaurs, hits again and wipes all of humanity out, there is no "back" of any currency anywhere. I mean, if you're going to go down that road, let's take it to it's conclusion. However, in the everyday world, the US dollar has a lot behind it. Like a huge military. No country is going to come in and take over the USA and throw out our money. Because we have a big military. There's a lot of trade going on with greenbacks. It is the world currency. I'm not saying it is impossible for the dollar to go down the tubes, please don't assume I'm that stupid, nor anyone else is. But there's a hell of a lot more reasons to stick with US dollars as a store of value, rather than bitcoin. Bit coin has got nothing, just a bunch of narcoterrorists and billionaires trying to smuggle out ill-gotten gains so they don't have to pay taxes. And the speculators working from the greater fool theory.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Yes, but at least greenbacks are backed by real stuff. Fiat currencies are not “backed”, you have nothing they are even theoretically guaranteed to be exchangeable for, at a fixed rate of currency to commodity, setting a value floor, at least relative to the commodity. They are, instead, actively managed. The theory is that this is better, at least for large, geopolitically and economically powerful, countries as issuers, because backing commodities themselves are only at best a limited fit for the (even as a value basis) desirable features of currency, and have somewhat random performance at any given time compared to that “at best”, and active management (which is also not perfect!) seems to be able to do better, if the manager governs a big and powerful enough market to start with.

Even better: being able to create money out of thin air…oh wait.

traveler01 4y ago

Isn't that what the federal reserve is being doing for the last decades?

jqpabc123 4y ago
I know ... just let anyone act like the federal reserve for fun and profit. 12,000 cryptocurrencies and "stable coins" later (the number doubled over the last year) --- does anyone really feel like the problem has been fixed?
- coralreef 4y ago
  Just because you can clone Facebook doesn’t mean you get a valuable user base
  - jqpabc123 4y ago
    Crypto is much easier to clone than Facebook --- as evidenced by the fact they are multiplying like rabbits. The only thing restraining the creation of crypto is the fact that it is virtually unusable as an actual currency. If it were otherwise, every celebrity, politician and corporation would just mint their own continuous stream of the stuff. There is nothing to stop them. Productive work would become obsolete. Why work to "earn" money when you can just mint it? A lot of life's major problems could be solved instantly by crypto. If you buy this, I've got some crypto to sell you.
    - coralreef 4y ago
      Creating something doesn’t automatically make it valuable. You’re failing to realize that value is socially derived.
      - jqpabc123 4y ago
        You’re failing to realize that value is socially derived. You're failing to realize that lots of people/companies have a larger social presence than Satoshi Nakamoto and are thus in a much stronger position to derive value from their own crypto. But most of these have had the good sense thus far to avoid crypto scams due to the potential legal issues. Kim Kardashian being one example of a prominent exception. https://decrypt.co/106533/kim-kardashian-ethereum-max-dismiss-lawsuit https://decrypt.co/106533/kim-kardashian-ethereum-max-dismis...
        coralreef 4y ago
        Corporations generally avoid creating cryptocurrencies because of the immense regulation and legal work they would have to do. And because banking regulation and compliance is generally out of their wheelhouse. Facebook tried it with their fiat basket backed stable coin.
        jqpabc123 4y ago
        Crypto isn't regulated at the current time --- at least not in the USA. However, the fact it isn't regulated doesn't mean they can't be sued in civil court for running a scam. This is what they are really afraid of --- see Kim Kardashian for an example. This is why crypto bros tend to hide their identify (Satoshi) or re-locate outside the USA and go into hiding once the scam collapses (the guys from 3AC). BOTTOM LINE: Selling electrons as money from your momma's basement is a shady business in more ways than one. Participate at your own risk.
ProllyInfamous 4y ago
...as well as any/all US Chartered banks/FCUs. See "Fractional Reserve Banking." Fidelis in Numeris
- jqpabc123 4y ago
  See "stable coins" --- particularly Tether which underpins more than half of all crypto trades. It's "fractional reserve banking" --- only worse --- minus any accountability or guarantee of solvency. Crypto solves all the problems of the Federal Reserve and banking --- simply by mimicing it for fun and profit. If you buy that, I've got some crypto to sell you.
As_You_Wish 4y ago
Yes, but at least greenbacks are backed by real stuff. Backed by the USA, all the millions of workers, the US military, goods being produced, etc. Can a national currency be wiped out? Sure, through mismanagement. BUT, that does not negate the fact that the US dollar is backed by a whole lot of actual assets. Crypto is backed by nothing. Nothing.
- coralreef 4y ago
  You misuse the word “backed”. The US economy does not “back” the dollar, figuratively or literally. America, it’s workers, corporations, military, etc., will happily abandon the dollar should it become necessary. No one wants to be paid in money undergoing massive devaluation.
  - As_You_Wish 4y ago
    I'm not misusing the word "backed." I'm assuming some sophistication from the reader. And to that point, it is true that nothing backs the dollar, but nothing backs nothing if you go down that road. In past times, when, let's say a city was being attacked and there's a seige, and food runs out, people will sell their $500,000 diamond ring for a potato, so diamonds and gold have no value as compared to a potato. However, if a meteor like the one that hit the earth 65 million years ago and wiped out the dinosaurs, hits again and wipes all of humanity out, there is no "back" of any currency anywhere. I mean, if you're going to go down that road, let's take it to it's conclusion. However, in the everyday world, the US dollar has a lot behind it. Like a huge military. No country is going to come in and take over the USA and throw out our money. Because we have a big military. There's a lot of trade going on with greenbacks. It is the world currency. I'm not saying it is impossible for the dollar to go down the tubes, please don't assume I'm that stupid, nor anyone else is. But there's a hell of a lot more reasons to stick with US dollars as a store of value, rather than bitcoin. Bit coin has got nothing, just a bunch of narcoterrorists and billionaires trying to smuggle out ill-gotten gains so they don't have to pay taxes. And the speculators working from the greater fool theory.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Yes, but at least greenbacks are backed by real stuff. Fiat currencies are not “backed”, you have nothing they are even theoretically guaranteed to be exchangeable for, at a fixed rate of currency to commodity, setting a value floor, at least relative to the commodity. They are, instead, actively managed. The theory is that this is better, at least for large, geopolitically and economically powerful, countries as issuers, because backing commodities themselves are only at best a limited fit for the (even as a value basis) desirable features of currency, and have somewhat random performance at any given time compared to that “at best”, and active management (which is also not perfect!) seems to be able to do better, if the manager governs a big and powerful enough market to start with.