Society/Culture Elon Musk abandons crypto

[Evolved1]

It has ALL of the attributes of a ponzi.

A Ponzi uses money from late investors to pay a return to early investors. Ponzi's collapse when there's insufficient new money coming in to pay the expected returns.

There's plenty of Ponzi's in the cryptosphere, but bictoin itself doesnt meet the definition. It's traded like any other commodity and there's 14 years of history as evidence that it has value, as agreed by the market.

Another facet of Ponzi's is that they're started to steal money from late investors. The creator of bitcoin hasn't moved or sold their stash of over 1 million bitcoin which today is valued at over $30 billion.

 

[Chief]

there's 14 years of history as evidence that it has value, as agreed by the market.

Here's the issue with that: a price doesn't mean it has utility.

As discussed before, property has utility as housing or a place of business. Silver has industrial uses. Shares have a use as a fractional ownership of a business.

They aren't substitutable for one another - they have their own unique properties.

Crypto doesn't do any of these things better. It's a solution looking for a problem it can solve better than the existing solution. Apart from scams and tax dodging I can't see any way in which it improves on existing solutions.

The blockchain itself might yield benefits, but it seems to be vapourware.

I hadn't heard about Helium - $345 m invested for $6500 in monthly income and a million useless wifi boxes polluting the planet. A token that has lost 75% of its price. Ownership that skims off the top of every transaction by minting tokens for itself. A business model that tells customers to ignore the terms of their existing isp agreements, and doesn't throttle new boxes in crowded locations.

 

[Chief]

You don't understand what a pump and dump is. Tesla sold at a loss btw.

Why didn't Elon Tweet out a meme about selling? Go on TV to promote the event?

Seems he only does that when he wants the price to go up.

 

[Gethelred]

A Ponzi uses money from late investors to pay a return to early investors. Ponzi's collapse when there's insufficient new money coming in to pay the expected returns.

There's plenty of Ponzi's in the cryptosphere, but bictoin itself doesnt meet the definition. It's traded like any other commodity and there's 14 years of history as evidence that it has value, as agreed by the market.

Another facet of Ponzi's is that they're started to steal money from late investors. The creator of bitcoin hasn't moved or sold their stash of over 1 million bitcoin which today is valued at over $30 billion.

Which is why I like to think of it as a Ponzi scheme sitting atop a Bigger Fool con.

But then, so kind of is all money in the first place.

 

[Evolved1]

Here's the issue with that: a price doesn't mean it has utility.

As discussed before, property has utility as housing or a place of business. Silver has industrial uses. Shares have a use as a fractional ownership of a business.

They aren't substitutable for one another - they have their own unique properties.

It does have utility though. It functions as a financial system completely separated from government and reserve bank control. You can buy and sell goods using crypto, as I've done many times over the years.

Adoption, further scarcity, and reduction in mining rewards mean that bitcoin is highly likely to hit higher prices after the next halving in 2024. Given the level of ignorance most of the public has in respect to crypto and bitcoin in particular, there's plenty of room to grow still.

Crypto doesn't do any of these things better. It's a solution looking for a problem it can solve better than the existing solution. Apart from scams and tax dodging I can't see any way in which it improves on existing solutions. The blockchain itself might yield benefits, but it seems to be vapourware.

It's not trying to compete with property, shares, silver, or gold. The crypto ecosystem is entirely separate and I view it as a hedge against world governments and their financial systems.

It's a social experiment. Where that social experiment leads to is anyones guess, yet the prevailing view that it's all going to zero has been equally successful as Essendon's finals campaigns since bitcoins inception.

Tax avoidance is fairly difficult given exchanges provide data to the ATO. There are ways around it, but they aren't easy enough to make tax avoidance a major issue.

I hadn't heard about Helium - $345 m invested for $6500 in monthly income and a million useless wifi boxes polluting the planet. A token that has lost 75% of its price. Ownership that skims off the top of every transaction by minting tokens for itself. A business model that tells customers to ignore the terms of their existing isp agreements, and doesn't throttle new boxes in crowded locations.

I don't know much about Helium.

If you want to know what a crypto Ponzi scheme looks like, Bitconnect is probably the best example.

 

[Evolved1]

Why didn't Elon Tweet out a meme about selling? Go on TV to promote the event?

Seems he only does that when he wants the price to go up.

I'm sure he wants price to go up given they still have 25% of the BTC holdings. As to Elons behaviour, that's anybodies guess. He's called Tesla shares and BTC overpriced while having large holdings.

 

[Evolved1]

Which is why I like to think of it as a Ponzi scheme sitting atop a Bigger Fool con.

But then, so kind of is all money in the first place.

I'm yet to see a good explanation as to why bitcoin fits the definition of a Ponzi scheme.

I like to think of it as the most predictable and easy way for plebs to get rich. Crypto cycles/bubbles are built around halving events.

 

[Gethelred]

I'm yet to see a good explanation as to why bitcoin fits the definition of a Ponzi scheme.

I like to think of it as the most predictable and easy way for plebs to get rich. Crypto cycles/bubbles are built around halving events.

You yourself have provided your definition of a Ponzi scheme above:

A Ponzi uses money from late investors to pay a return to early investors.

The initial push to get Crypto out there to purchase a commodity with no value, marketing it as a currency of the future and watching your initial investments skyrocket as the currency value improves resembles this definition if it isn't quite spot on.

But where the difference lies is in the Greater Fool con side of things: you have convinced a percentage of people that your worthless commodity is now worth something, and you divest that worthless commodity to the greater fool just before it is revealed the emperor is wearing no clothes.

 

[Evolved1]

You yourself have provided your definition of a Ponzi scheme above:

Defining bitcoin as a Ponzi on the basis that early adopters/investors made money from selling it would make pretty much anything a Ponzi. Amazon? Ponzi. Tesla? Ponzi.

Bitcoin doesn't promise absurd interest rates or dividends like most (all?) Ponzi's do. You simply buy and sell just like any commodity or currency.

The initial push to get Crypto out there to purchase a commodity with no value, marketing it as a currency of the future and watching your initial investments skyrocket as the currency value improves resembles this definition if it isn't quite spot on.

We're well beyond any definition of an "initial push" given bitcoin is 14 years old. You may think it has no value, but the market disagrees. There's no CEO of bitcoin, no centralised point of control, so who is controlling this bitcoin Ponzi? Did they hold through every bubble top and 85% drop, all the way to new all time highs? How many market cycles did they hold through?

But where the difference lies is in the Greater Fool con side of things: you have convinced a percentage of people that your worthless commodity is now worth something, and you divest that worthless commodity to the greater fool just before it is revealed the emperor is wearing no clothes.

When do you see this great reveal happening? What would be its impetus?

 

[Toump Ass]

Bit privileged to say it bitcoin doesn't have "utility".

You want to be big aussie pisshead and drink 12 cans of woodstock and cola after work every night and go beat up your wife or something no worries mate, can't even close the bottle-o during a pandemic because pissheads can't get pissed and live without woody and cola. I heard that one of the reasons dan murphy stayed open during COVID was alcoholics would die if they didn't drink, how ****ed is that? Pretty ****ed. But yeah skol skol skol skol!!! whooo!!!! pass the beer bong!!! Who's got the keys?!?!

But if you want to smoke a tiny little joint well too bad. Ever have a weed dealer? Yeah me too those dudes are numpties, my last weed dealer was called "marbles" that's the name I gave him because he spoke like he had marbles in his mouth. "How you doing marbles?" <sound of glass balls clicking together> "Yeah woke up smoked bongs you?" it sucked having to deal with that campaigner seriously I hated it.

Now, I buy crypto, spend crypto, weed arrives in my letterbox. Brilliant, how good is that, I can literally organise it while I'm checking emails or taking a s**t and 24 hours later some dude knocks on my door with an ounce. How's that not "utility"?! It's amazing!

And it's not just weed either. My prescription meds were $150 on them a month before getting on the PBS only recently - that's $1800 a year not including the time off work to see the campaigner who wrote the prescription for $170 for a half hour session every six weeks, literally every six weeks, and he was asleep for half the sessions anyway. What a joke. But, thanks to a helpful guide on Reddit, a little patience, and some BITCOIN... guess what? Same s**t, half the price, none of the hassle, all sent direct to my door! Ponzi scheme you say!

* Elon Musk.

 

[Evolved1]

Bit privileged to say it bitcoin doesn't have "utility".

You want to be big aussie pisshead and drink 12 cans of woodstock and cola after work every night and go beat up your wife or something no worries mate, can't even close the bottle-o during a pandemic because pissheads can't get pissed and live without woody and cola. I heard that one of the reasons dan murphy stayed open during COVID was alcoholics would die if they didn't drink, how *ed is that? Pretty *ed. But yeah skol skol skol skol!!! whooo!!!! pass the beer bong!!! Who's got the keys?!?!

But if you want to smoke a tiny little joint well too bad. Ever have a weed dealer? Yeah me too those dudes are numpties, my last weed dealer was called "marbles" that's the name I gave him because he spoke like he had marbles in his mouth. "How you doing marbles?" <sound of glass balls clicking together> "Yeah woke up smoked bongs you?" it sucked having to deal with that campaigner seriously I hated it.

Now, I buy crypto, spend crypto, weed arrives in my letterbox. Brilliant, how good is that, I can literally organise it while I'm checking emails or taking a s**t and 24 hours later some dude knocks on my door with an ounce. How's that not "utility"?! It's amazing!

And it's not just weed either. My prescription meds were $150 on them a month before getting on the PBS only recently - that's $1800 a year not including the time off work to see the campaigner who wrote the prescription for $170 for a half hour session every six weeks, literally every six weeks, and he was asleep for half the sessions anyway. What a joke. But, thanks to a helpful guide on Reddit, a little patience, and some BITCOIN... guess what? Same s**t, half the price, none of the hassle, all sent direct to my door! Ponzi scheme you say!

* Elon Musk.

Preach it, brother!

 

[Chief]

the Greater Fool

Yes it definitely fits that description.

Just about every time people have talked about individual projects and systems as proof that crypto has utility, not too long afterwards those schemes collapse or are shown to be scams.

Staked coins get stolen or the system collapses. NFT wash trading. Helium "miners" see their return drop to cents a month and the token drops from $40 to $9.

It seems if you wait long enough their true value becomes evident: $0

 

[Number37]

I buy itunes gift cards all the time. I also buy crypto. I exchange the giftcards on an app called itunes. I exchange the crypto on a site called… well I won’t name it, but it sells lots of things that are a little hard to find in regular shops.

Are gift cards assets? What about cash? Why not crypto when I can use it to buy things just like I use regular money?

Gift cards are not assets.
Neither is cash.

Both are fiat currency.

 

[Chief]

Gift cards are not assets.
Neither is cash.

Both are fiat currency.

Gift cards are not fiat currency.

 

[Toump Ass]

Gift cards are not assets.
Neither is cash.

Both are fiat currency

Gift cards are not fiat currency.
Cash is an asset.

And you can exchange Bitcoin for cash and other things which are also assets.

 

[Number37]

Gift cards are not fiat currency.

It is printed on them...."treat this $50 gift card like it is cash". Also, "not redeemable for cash". (Mixed messages much?) Only redeemable at the Gift shop.

What does it say on $50 cash? Property of the Australian govt. By authority Reserve Bank. Signed Phillip Lowe.

What does it say on a $50 cheque? I Chief authorise Cayman Islands bank to pay Google the sum of $50. Fifty Dollars. Signed Chief.


None of them are worth $50. Literally only worth the paper they are printed on. (i.e fiat)
So where does the 50 bucks come from?
By decree. ie currency.

 

[Number37]

Gift cards are not fiat currency.
Cash is an asset.

And you can exchange Bitcoin for cash and other things which are also assets.

Cash isn't an asset.
The promise that the currency issuer will pay the sum printed on the cash is the asset.

The physical cash is like a note from Yo Mama saying she's good for the money should someone accept it as payment.

 

[Toump Ass]

Cash isn't an asset.
The promise that the currency issuer will pay the sum printed on the cash is the asset.

The physical cash is like a note from Yo Mama saying she's good for the money should someone accept it as payment.

True. However in accounting terms, cash is an asset. And it includes bank balances as well as physical notes.

And a note from my mum is also an asset- a worthless one, but an asset nonetheless

 

[Number37]

True. However in accounting terms, cash is an asset. And it includes bank balances as well as physical notes.

And a note from my mum is also an asset- a worthless one, but an asset nonetheless

Cash and physical notes meet the accounting definition of asset because their future economic benefits are guaranteed by the Reserve Bank.
$50 Monopoly money is not an asset because nobody is ponying up for the future economic benefits.

 

[Chief]

It is printed on them...."treat this $50 gift card like it is cash".

That does not make it fiat currency.

 

[Number37]

That does not make it fiat currency.

Fiat = stuff it is made from isn't worth the value inscribed.

The paper/plastic a $20 note is printed on isn't worth $20.
The metal that makes up a $2 coin isn't worth $2.

The value comes from the inscription because the RB Governor guarantees the value....just like a cheque is guaranteed by a bank.....just like the gift card is guaranteed by its issuer.

They are examples of chose in action....which is a legal right to intangible property.

 

[Chief]

Fiat = stuff it is made from isn't worth the value inscribed.

No. That isn't what it means.

It's - and I Googled to get the wording right - government-issued currency not backed by a commodity. A $20 note is a $20 note because the government says it is a $20 note and people must accept it in payment.

 

[Number37]

No. That isn't what it means.

It's - and I Googled to get the wording right - government-issued currency not backed by a commodity. A $20 note is a $20 note because the government says it is a $20 note and people must accept it in payment.

Out of curiosity what is the difference between "stuff it is made from is not the value inscribed" and "govt issued currency not backed by a commodity"?

 

[Chief]

Out of curiosity what is the difference between "stuff it is made from is not the value inscribed" and "govt issued currency not backed by a commodity"?

Tell me how an iTunes card is a government issued currency not backed by a commodity.

This should be good.

 

[Number37]

Tell me how an iTunes card is a government issued currency not backed by a commodity.

This should be good.

Tell me how they determine that a $20 Itunes card allows you spend $20 spend in the AppStore? ie How is it worth $20?

While you're at it, tell me how you purchased your $20 Itunes card. Didn't you just trade $20 for a card?
What do you reckon your redress would be if Apple said "psyche, your Itunes card is worthless, thanks for the 20 bucks sucker!!"?