Crypto investors panic during market bloodbath

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by TC94

Cryptocurrency is a misnomer. Bitcoin can actually be used as a programming base. Ethereum even more so. I’ve posted this before here, but now the big players are starting to understand these things.

That said, as I’ve also posted here, 98% of crypto is pure junk. Scams, disappearing projects, token sales that are never used as advertised to build out, etc.

Snippet above, though agree with all you said. In a sense, the 'core program language' allows for many new ways to do things. An interesting way to use math that 'checks out' and is verifiable without any doubt.

[Chester01]

I mean who really thought this wasn’t coming? I mean a made up construct, backed by nothing other than group hysteria and belief, and the idea of token of some kind in a made up place called the inter webs. I mean people should have started worrying back when they started putting dogs on fake tokens that don’t actually exist. This is what happens when people who start believing that a fake made up place is actually real. It’s not, it’s fake, and it’s doing far more harm than good. And I’m talking about just about everything that has come from tue cyber world. Almost any perceived good has an equal downside.

There is this massive bias that technology is always good and they always have the best solutions to just about anything. They don’t and I feel badly for those that bought into the hysteria as they have been largely brainwashed. I see almost a hubris that technology can solve all the problems be it monetary, educational, healthcare, relationships, parenting, etc.

[Dyim]

There is always going to be someone that get burned in any get rich quick scheme.

[m j b]

I read this entire thread. My head hurts.

[RUSH2689]

Originally Posted by m j b

I read this entire thread. My head hurts.

+1

If it can’t be explained simply, it is not understood well enough

[joeychitwood]

I wonder if this will affect the construction of a huge new Bitcoin mining facility in nearby North Dakota? It will use as much power solving puzzles as a medium-sized city every day. Somehow burning through massive amounts of energy solving the brain teasers results in production of wealth. I’ve read countless articles, but I still don’t understand the concept.

[Uggi]

Originally Posted by RUSH2689

If it can’t be explained simply, it is not understood well enough

I know what you mean but I’ve tried to understand the General Theory of Relativity many times. Can’t do it. But I accept that enough other people understand it enough to make it real/valid.

[RUSH2689]

Originally Posted by Uggi

I know what you mean but I’ve tried to understand the General Theory of Relativity many times. Can’t do it. But I accept that enough other people understand it enough to make it real/valid.

Laws of science? Sure, I agree with you

Religious beliefs? Faith

New units of currency that people are funneling their hard earned $ into? Nah, I’d like to understand how that works frontwards, backwards and sidewise before opening my digital pocketbook.

[Uggi]

Originally Posted by RUSH2689

Laws of science? Sure, I agree with you

Religious beliefs? Faith

New units of currency that people are funneling their hard earned $ into? Nah, I’d like to understand how that works frontwards, backwards and sidewise before opening my digital pocketbook.

If you have the appropriate mathematical background you could understand it frontwards, backwards and sideways - there is enough literature out there to explain it IF you speak that language.
I don’t speak “maths” at that level - so I cannot understand it, not without investing years of time to learn the language and understand the deep complexities of the maths behind it and within it.
But … I understand conceptually what it is and what it’s benefits are and that’s enough for me. I use things and buy things created by mathematicians and engineers every day without understanding exactly how they work.
If some idiots go “all in” and put every penny they have into cryptocurrency - which it seems they actually do from some of the comments/links in this thread - that’s as stupid as putting every penny you have into Haribo shares.

[RUSH2689]

Originally Posted by Uggi

If you have the appropriate mathematical background you could understand it frontwards, backwards and sideways - there is enough literature out there to explain it IF you speak that language.
I don’t speak “maths” at that level - so I cannot understand it, not without investing years of time to learn the language and understand the deep complexities of the maths behind it and within it.
But … I understand conceptually what it is and what it’s benefits are and that’s enough for me. I use things and buy things created by mathematicians and engineers every day without understanding exactly how they work.
If some idiots go “all in” and put every penny they have into cryptocurrency - which it seems they actually do from some of the comments/links in this thread - that’s as stupid as putting every penny you have into Haribo shares.

You make a very valid point.

[Uggi]

Originally Posted by RUSH2689

You make a very valid point.

Thanks - appreciate that.

[Zack21]

I hesitate to reply to this thread because, to be honest, I lack the technical background to understand blockchain or its significance in a meaningful way. I also understand that most/many things have either gone digital or are headed in that direction. Both photography and audio recordings have basically completed the transition. I fully understand that persuasive arguments can be made that both film cameras and vinyl records offer attributes that their digital counterparts cannot render but, there is no dispute that the digital versions of these examples have massively larger market share than the analog formats. Therefore, it seems perfectly logical that digital currency is the future.

I do have a problem identifying/predicting which digital currency will survive and become the de facto currency (or at least a surviving future crypto). I was in college in the early 80's and I lacked the financial means at that time to be an investor but I remember (correctly) believing the personal computer would gain more mainstream adoption even though few students had their own computer and real world personal computer applications were pretty limited at that time. If I would have had money to invest in the early to mid '80s, I could have easily invested in Wang computer stock and probably lost all my investment even though the thesis that personal computers would be widely adopted was correct. So, I have basically been an observer to the crypto market (aside from a very small position that I am under water in) because I can't commit to any particular cryptocurrency. I get that Bitcoin is the current leader but apparently it is not great for various reasons for real world transactions. The advocates of BTC state it is not really about transactions as it is a store of value like gold. My small brain analysis wonders why some digital currency can't be both a storage of value and a currency. Also, being first (or even being potentially "better") is not a guarantee of success. Wasn't the Sony Betamax recorder released first (or at least very early on) and wasn't it arguably better than VHS in some respects? Sony lost the battle for home recording at the time. Ethereum is again one of the leaders but apparently if ETH is used for transactions, someone faces high transaction fees (aka gas fees). Maybe the future crypto standard has yet to be released. Clearly, I have no idea what the future holds and I am not a crypto basher by any means. I just don't know the best place to park my hard earned dollars for investment purposes.

[huncho]

Originally Posted by Zack21

I hesitate to reply to this thread because, to be honest, I lack the technical background to understand blockchain or its significance in a meaningful way. I also understand that most/many things have either gone digital or are headed in that direction. Both photography and audio recordings have basically completed the transition. I fully understand that persuasive arguments can be made that both film cameras and vinyl records offer attributes that their digital counterparts cannot render but, there is no dispute that the digital versions of these examples have massively larger market share than the analog formats. Therefore, it seems perfectly logical that digital currency is the future.

I do have a problem identifying/predicting which digital currency will survive and become the de facto currency (or at least a surviving future crypto). I was in college in the early 80's and I lacked the financial means at that time to be an investor but I remember (correctly) believing the personal computer would gain more mainstream adoption even though few students had their own computer and real world personal computer applications were pretty limited at that time. If I would have had money to invest in the early to mid '80s, I could have easily invested in Wang computer stock and probably lost all my investment even though the thesis that personal computers would be widely adopted was correct. So, I have basically been an observer to the crypto market (aside from a very small position that I am under water in) because I can't commit to any particular cryptocurrency. I get that Bitcoin is the current leader but apparently it is not great for various reasons for real world transactions. The advocates of BTC state it is not really about transactions as it is a store of value like gold. My small brain analysis wonders why some digital currency can't be both a storage of value and a currency. Also, being first (or even being potentially "better") is not a guarantee of success. Wasn't the Sony Betamax recorder released first (or at least very early on) and wasn't it arguably better than VHS in some respects? Sony lost the battle for home recording at the time. Ethereum is again one of the leaders but apparently if ETH is used for transactions, someone faces high transaction fees (aka gas fees). Maybe the future crypto standard has yet to be released. Clearly, I have no idea what the future holds and I am not a crypto basher by any means. I just don't know the best place to park my hard earned dollars for investment purposes.

i think you're thinking of it the wrong way. none of the current cryptos will likely become a currency, government backed stables will likely do that. crypto is largely just trying to innovate tech in a decentralized fashion, as in, no governing body that can control transactions (cancel, revert, etc)

the reason something like btc can't be a currecy is because you have to pay capital gains taxes on all purchases made with it, so it's better for just the bigger ticket purchases, and eth was never meant to be a currency. eth is basically an open source software platform that anyone can take and implement their own crypto on and currently it faces a big issue with fees which makes it unusable in most of its use cases unless you have a lot of money. at this point these two are established enough to stay long term but the rest is super risky to invest long term in. there's a lot of good ideas coming in crypto but none are something you wanna hold for a long period of time like btc/eth. mostly just get in, make your gains and get out, because no one knows what the microsoft, apple, amazon, etc of the space will be. even the good ones like avalanche and sol went down something like 90%

[Gab27]

Originally Posted by huncho

i think you're thinking of it the wrong way. none of the current cryptos will likely become a currency, government backed stables will likely do that. crypto is largely just trying to innovate tech in a decentralized fashion, as in, no governing body that can control transactions (cancel, revert, etc)

the reason something like btc can't be a currecy is because you have to pay capital gains taxes on all purchases made with it, so it's better for just the bigger ticket purchases

Beyond that, the Bitcoin network is slow, lacks capacity to process very many simultaneous transactions, and network fees are pretty high. Further, sending BTC from my hardware wallet is a very secure process, but also a relatively lengthy process compared to swiping a card. All of that presents issues if I am trying to buy a meal, pay for a vet bill, or order something from Amazon where if I buy it in XX minutes I can get same day shipping. AFAIK, there really isn't any great solution at this point for that with respect to Bitcoin.

I am curious to see what the future brings for backed stablecoins and how their usage scenario will play out. I imagine one area we might see a lot of growth is with developing countries who have a growing export market but a relatively limited infrastructure/weaker national currency. We're definitely still in the infancy of this.

[huncho]

Originally Posted by Gab27

Beyond that, the Bitcoin network is slow, lacks capacity to process very many simultaneous transactions, and network fees are pretty high. Further, sending BTC from my hardware wallet is a very secure process, but also a relatively lengthy process compared to swiping a card. All of that presents issues if I am trying to buy a meal, pay for a vet bill, or order something from Amazon where if I buy it in XX minutes I can get same day shipping. AFAIK, there really isn't any great solution at this point for that with respect to Bitcoin.

I am curious to see what the future brings for backed stablecoins and how their usage scenario will play out. I imagine one area we might see a lot of growth is with developing countries who have a growing export market but a relatively limited infrastructure/weaker national currency. We're definitely still in the infancy of this.

yeah for bitcoin to be used more commonly it would require mass adoption of the lightning network. i think that's what twitter's ceo stepped down for and will focus on with square. unless (dream scenario) one day apple implements it into apple pay, not that i would use it to pay for anything but that would fully legitimize it in the space

[scarlet knight]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Solid dividend growth companies.

That works over time. I sat on a few good stocks since the 1990s, reinvested dividends, now worth a fair amount of moolah.

[Zack21]

Huncho: thank you for taking the time to help educate me on this subject. Gab27: your input is appreciated as well.

[scarlet knight]

Warren Buffett said he would not pay $25 for all of bitcoin.

[huncho]

Originally Posted by scarlet knight

Warren Buffett said he would not pay $25 for all of bitcoin.

he also mentions time and time again that he doesn't invest in things he doesn't understand. no one can expect a 90 year old to understand crypto, he's a legend but people shouldn't live and die by him

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by scarlet knight

That works over time. I sat on a few good stocks since the 1990s, reinvested dividends, now worth a fair amount of moolah.

Yes indeed it does. This has been my approach since the early 90's.

Lower volatility, and dividend growth over time. Thos approach almost doubles the returns, and provides dividend income in retirement

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[Vetracer]

Blockchain technology will be adopted by governments in the form of Central Bank Digital Currencies in the near future. China is already there.

Take your pick. Do you want one that’s inherently deflationary with a fixed supply or one which governments can inflate and directly manipulate at will?

Consider that once CDBCs are introduced:

- your exact income, outgoings, where you spent your money will be will be known by your government.
- your government can choose to switch off your money supply or restrict where you shop.
- you basically surrender full control.

I’ve been stacking BTC and ETH since 2016 and my strategy is to play with the hyped alt coins then once they’re in profit to sell to buy more BTC. It takes discipline and not being greedy. So far I win more than I lose.

[TC94]

Remember that earlier in the thread I’ve stated 98% of crypto is junk.

Also they aren’t really currency, but mathematical constructs that Kevin O’Leary calls software platforms. Scroll back and watch that 4 min video. We can assign them value. Right now its all speculation. But eventually the value will become whatever the use of the programmed function is worth.

I’m also NOT trying to convince anyone to invest. I discourage my family and friends from doing so, but a couple do whatever I do.

With all that out there: you don’t have to understand something for it to be of value. How many here or your kids can explain an internal combustion engine? How many here understand the inner workings of a smart phone or laptop?

How about language needed to create a video game or spreadsheet software?

As K O’Leary says, they are software platform on which many things can be programmed. As such, their utility is almost unlimited.

If we can think it, someone can program it to be done without having to trust any party and without the ability to be hacked or altered by anyone. Some will survive and become the underpinnings of smart contracts, land registrations, cheap rapid intercontinental money exchanges, video games w/micro purchases, authentication of goods, food and pharmaceutical tracking and verification, and banking.

The banking value comes in from under developed countries. Until I got involved in bitcoin 5 years ago, I had no idea over 50% of the world doesn’t have access to a bank. But most have smart phones.

That said, do your own research. No idea which of these will be around in 12 months or 10 years. But the ones that are will be a gigantic revolutionary change to the way things are done. Yet we might not even see the difference as the end user. Just another app on our phone.

[Mendota]

Originally Posted by scarlet knight

Warren Buffett said he would not pay $25 for all of bitcoin.

While true about Bitcoin itself, Berkshire bought $1billion worth of stock in Nubank this year, which focuses entirely on digital banking via Bitcoin transactions. Last year they bought another $500 million in Nubank stock before they went IPO. So Berkshire is indirectly in it. They understand this is the future of consumer banking and fintech in Latin America and they are taking an early position in the largest player.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

[Moondoggy]

Can someone translate this thread for me please.

[Uggi]

Originally Posted by Moondoggy

Can someone translate this thread for me please.

Ok:

"nobody knows what will happen to the prices of cryptocurrencies in the future".

[Moondoggy]

Originally Posted by Uggi

Ok:

"nobody knows what will happen to the prices of cryptocurrencies in the future".

Know.

[Star Ferry]

The implication that crypto is adding value like the internal combustion engine… I guess it’s possible, but it’s sort of a wild argument.

— Can you pay for my crypto vision?

— no, sorry, I don’t understand it.

— Well so what, you don’t understand nitrogen fertilizer, semiconductors, the internet, or [insert other far more proven tech]. Hand me your cash, simpleton!

the people being wiped out are highly leveraged. And that is just another word for using other people’s money. When you use other people’s money to fund your vision, they have to believe in that vision. And telling your financial backers “you just don’t get it” is probably not going to work

BTW, If all an entity does is advance blockchain and develop useful real world applications for it, then why would that entity even be affected by the price of coins? The people taking a beating are pure speculators. Let’s not conflate them with talented, innovative technologists.

[Rock Strongo]

People are conflating "crypto" as an all-encompassing term. There's a lot of different pieces, some way easier to understand than others.

Blockchain is the underlying technology that has many real-world valuable implications. It's, very simply, a shared database that everyone has a copy of so it can't be manipulated vs. being stored by one entity in one place.

Then there are some financial products built on top of this because of the ledger functionality. Bitcoin is the most popular. Scarcity is produced by the difficulty of work generating currency.

There are products built on the blockchain around tons of other things. Apps, games, NFTs, etc. It's a wild west of unregulated startups and scams that people bet on being the next thing to go 10000x. Low barrier of entry and tons of options. These are the things we hear in the media (using that word loosely for the NY Post) to spread doom and gloom.

The issues people are getting themselves irresponsibly into are the exact reason why riskier investments are put behind the wall of Accredited Investors in the regulated world.

[austinp]

Originally Posted by Rock Strongo

People are conflating "crypto" as an all-encompassing term. There's a lot of different pieces, some way easier to understand than others.

Blockchain is the underlying technology that has many real-world valuable implications. It's, very simply, a shared database that everyone has a copy of so it can't be manipulated vs. being stored by one entity in one place.

Then there are some financial products built on top of this because of the ledger functionality. Bitcoin is the most popular. Scarcity is produced by the difficulty of work generating currency.

There are products built on the blockchain around tons of other things. Apps, games, NFTs, etc. It's a wild west of unregulated startups and scams that people bet on being the next thing to go 10000x. Low barrier of entry and tons of options. These are the things we hear in the media (using that word loosely for the NY Post) to spread doom and gloom.

The issues people are getting themselves irresponsibly into are the exact reason why riskier investments are put behind the wall of Accredited Investors in the regulated world.

I think that’s the most clear explanation of this that I’ve ever read. Thank you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mifune]

If we're still in the 'xplain it to me like I am a 7 year old' segment... then what's the point, and you should probably continue to 'legacy' your way into the future or you can merely buy exposure thru grayscale or paypal.

as far as the 'why' this happened last week... we all know that terra stable coin de-pegged from the 1$ correlation and so LUNA protocol had to liquidate it's holdings/backings to try and prop up and regain the peg... which did not work because the 'sell cascade' had already begun and the momentum was to high. When LUNA sold these 'Assets' in order to save peoples money and the TERRA stable coin, it put several billions of dollars of downward pressure on the asset class... 3.1 billion of which was on Bitcoin. nothing, including APPLE or AMAZON could have withstood 3.1 billion dollars of downward sell pressure as well as bitcoin did.

the resilience of the BTC network is AMAZING.