Crypto Currency Thread
Discussion
M511 said:
Croutons said:
People like this buy, sell and trade in multiple Cryptos. Plenty of it about. Site only refs dash, but they'll deal with anything.
http://milkbar.org.uk
Thanks Croutons, so after a few days of researching it turns out neither HMRC or FCA regulate cryptocurrencies so anyone can just open up and sell them. The only thing worth doing to cover your back side is to do a KYC on large transactions I guess but other than an update on regulations coming in, its fair game!http://milkbar.org.uk
k about any regulation or financial safeguards. They are the easiest group on the planet to scam as they base their trust not on any sane metric but on how fancy the website or app is and which famous person’s picture is being used. If anything, being regulated scares off this end of the market.
Cryptos blow away any ability binaries had to fleece punters. The only laws that pose any risk are the AML ones.
The very nature of the origins of crypto currencies also means that any form of regulation will be fought very strongly.
In the enormous rush and excitement to take part in the wholly legitimate crypto markets very many people are going to wiped by the legion of pure, unstoppable frauds.
We offer trading on cryptos via FCA regulated CFDs and secure funds but only the only 50s recognise the value in that security.
In theory the under 30s should be the savviest humans that have ever lived with regards to finance but in reality they are the most niaive. A baffling phenomenon.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Tuesday 15th May 22:57
DonkeyApple said:
In theory the under 30s should be the savviest humans that have ever lived with regards to finance but in reality they are the most niaive. A baffling phenomenon.
Why do you think that? The under 30's feel right royally screwed over by a financial system which has been broken for the last 10 years, and one which they see (arguably very correctly) as making those with money richer and those without poorer. It is well documented that they (we, I'm 29) will be the first generation in a long while to be poorer than our parents, and I imagine those from very poor backgrounds feel even more aggrieved, especially as they have been on the receiving end of a lot of the cuts to services and budgets. For example a nurse in her 40's with 2 kids living in a council property has not only had wages which are falling in real terms, but also will be affected by things like the bedroom tax, cuts to public services and tax credits.
Added to that the rise of the 'Instagram lifestyle' which has a massive affect on young, impressionable teenagers. At the press of a screen they are show lifestyles (often edited beyond belief) which show a standard of living they could never hope to experience with a regular job, and then suddenly they see some black kid who used to live down theirs ends living that life and telling everyone how he's done it? Of course everyone wants a bit of that.
Its partly financial ignorance, but I would argue far more strongly its a sense of desperation and a result of firstly a broken financial system, secondly a broken economy which isnt offering the opportunities they think they should have, and finally marketing from their peers showing them how easy it can be.
Of course you and I can sit back and see the holes in their stories and their systems, but a young impressionable kid who wants to believe its possible isnt going to care or ask too many questions. Its like magic, or Santa Clause - we all know its a lie, but if you want to believe it you will do. Adults do the same with clairvoyants.
Condi said:
DonkeyApple said:
In theory the under 30s should be the savviest humans that have ever lived with regards to finance but in reality they are the most niaive. A baffling phenomenon.
Why do you think that? The under 30's feel right royally screwed over by a financial system which has been broken for the last 10 years, and one which they see (arguably very correctly) as making those with money richer and those without poorer. It is well documented that they (we, I'm 29) will be the first generation in a long while to be poorer than our parents, and I imagine those from very poor backgrounds feel even more aggrieved, especially as they have been on the receiving end of a lot of the cuts to services and budgets. For example a nurse in her 40's with 2 kids living in a council property has not only had wages which are falling in real terms, but also will be affected by things like the bedroom tax, cuts to public services and tax credits.
Added to that the rise of the 'Instagram lifestyle' which has a massive affect on young, impressionable teenagers. At the press of a screen they are show lifestyles (often edited beyond belief) which show a standard of living they could never hope to experience with a regular job, and then suddenly they see some black kid who used to live down theirs ends living that life and telling everyone how he's done it? Of course everyone wants a bit of that.
Its partly financial ignorance, but I would argue far more strongly its a sense of desperation and a result of firstly a broken financial system, secondly a broken economy which isnt offering the opportunities they think they should have, and finally marketing from their peers showing them how easy it can be.
Of course you and I can sit back and see the holes in their stories and their systems, but a young impressionable kid who wants to believe its possible isnt going to care or ask too many questions. Its like magic, or Santa Clause - we all know its a lie, but if you want to believe it you will do. Adults do the same with clairvoyants.
So what if one generation is not as wealthy as another? Is that a genuine reason to be ignorant or greedy? That’s an insane perspective.
You mention the financial markets screwing them over for ten years? How? With cheap debt? That’s also a bafflingly illogical excuse.
Having lived through the credit crunch and seen the risks and dangers you would expect the group to be wiser and more savvy as a result. With the endless access to free information and learning you would expect the group to be so much wiser.
The fact that you open with blaming the financial system shows the huge lack of comprehension of the basics and is a strange outlook.
But your post doesn’t counter my point just suggests a theory as to why it might be correct.
We will all watch the crypto market evolve and for V2.0 to be born but what we know is that most participants will have lost money and that everyone will talk about the few who made lots. It’s absolutely no different from every market that has gone before but the financial niaivity combined with social media access of the consumer means it is going to be bigger than any that has gone before
Condi said:
DonkeyApple said:
In theory the under 30s should be the savviest humans that have ever lived with regards to finance but in reality they are the most niaive. A baffling phenomenon.
Why do you think that? We haven't had that much experience of being scammed and more importantly we think that it's someone else's fault if we do - where's my compensation, why didn't the government protect me from the nasty man that lied to me?
Therefore, we don't anticipate the probability of being ripped off and don't really think of it as our responsibility to avoid anyway. Combine that with a social media-let get-rich-quick-without-hard-work culture, we are sitting ducks.
We were all under 30 at some point, so all points of reference are valid.
The big change is the quantity & availability of information. Snake oil salesmen have always existed. I'm pretty sure the ability to parse truth & fiction is at much the same level.
The big change is the quantity & availability of information. Snake oil salesmen have always existed. I'm pretty sure the ability to parse truth & fiction is at much the same level.
Edited by Behemoth on Wednesday 16th May 10:47
coyft said:
Doesn't Bitcoin need to be used as money in order to have any long term value?
How is going to achieve this if it takes 10 minutes to process and verify a transaction?
Or am I missing something?
Small transactions will be layered over Bitcoin and these get settled to the blockchain. eg https://lightning.network/How is going to achieve this if it takes 10 minutes to process and verify a transaction?
Or am I missing something?
Never mind the 10 minutes, if all the world's receipts landed on the blockchain, it would become a ridiculous ledger very quickly. Nobody needs to see their purchase of a bag of crisps on the blockchain, immutable for all time.
coyft said:
Doesn't Bitcoin need to be used as money in order to have any long term value?
The problem is the BTC fanbois see it at currency and asset store, and look at the advantages of both without even acknowledging the disadvantages. They see BTC being worth a million and the dot being moved.The problem is BTC is loosing market share and becoming an intermedium in the crypto world. It been around long enough for mass adoption yet hasn't. It weaknesses put people off which is why other coins have grown and ine will eventually take BTC crown, not sure which.
NickCQ said:
Under 30's (and I am one so feel qualified to comment) have grown up in the era with the strongest consumer protections ever, which cover every facet of our lives.
We haven't had that much experience of being scammed and more importantly we think that it's someone else's fault if we do - where's my compensation, why didn't the government protect me from the nasty man that lied to me?
Therefore, we don't anticipate the probability of being ripped off and don't really think of it as our responsibility to avoid anyway. Combine that with a social media-let get-rich-quick-without-hard-work culture, we are sitting ducks.
That could be a very valid aspect. There is so much protection now in the conventional consumer market place that as you say, younger people simply may not have built up that natural wariness. Plus, the whole compensation structure behind the legitimate consumer market probably gives an entire impression that it doesn’t matter if you lose money because there will be an organisation that will give it all back to you. We haven't had that much experience of being scammed and more importantly we think that it's someone else's fault if we do - where's my compensation, why didn't the government protect me from the nasty man that lied to me?
Therefore, we don't anticipate the probability of being ripped off and don't really think of it as our responsibility to avoid anyway. Combine that with a social media-let get-rich-quick-without-hard-work culture, we are sitting ducks.
And definitely, the get rich quick hoopla plays hugely into the hands of people who seem to believe all the lifestyle lies on social media.
For decades I’ve seen the same scamming mechanisms run on numerous markets from gold, wines, penny shares but the binary betting scams were the first that saw these completely standard investment scams being soaked up by enormous numbers of people who never previously would have been targetable in the first instance and in the second instance never have the wealth to make targeting them even viable. The crypto market has turbo boosted even that. It is genuinely unbelievable how a hugely niaive section of society combined with being able to target them easily and cheaply and them having access to spending power has all come together to create a massive epidemic.
Behemoth said:
We were all under 30 at some point, so all points of reference are valid.
The big change is the quantity & availability of information. Snake oil salesmen have always existed. I'm pretty sure the ability to parse truth & fiction is at much the same level.
Absolutely. The structure of the scams are the same as they have always been. From selling shares in fake mining companies on the Australian or Canadian exchanges to door to door window sales, nothing at all has changed there. It’s their reach and the gullibility/greed of the population which is the change. The big change is the quantity & availability of information. Snake oil salesmen have always existed. I'm pretty sure the ability to parse truth & fiction is at much the same level.
Edited by Behemoth on Wednesday 16th May 10:47
Thesprucegoose said:
The problem is the BTC fanbois see it at currency and asset store, and look at the advantages of both without even acknowledging the disadvantages. They see BTC being worth a million and the dot being moved.
The problem is BTC is loosing market share and becoming an intermedium in the crypto world. It been around long enough for mass adoption yet hasn't. It weaknesses put people off which is why other coins have grown and ine will eventually take BTC crown, not sure which.
There are different ways to lose market share though. At this stage of the crypto market you would categorically expect BTC to lose share in percentage terms as other coins are continually coming to market. The problem is BTC is loosing market share and becoming an intermedium in the crypto world. It been around long enough for mass adoption yet hasn't. It weaknesses put people off which is why other coins have grown and ine will eventually take BTC crown, not sure which.
The key metric is the daily transaction volume growth rather than looking at % of market share as you know the latter must fall even if BTC is growing.
If you drill down through all the hype the typical transaction size of the average punter is wholly negligible. Most punters are playing with pennies. The real use of a coin beyond the get rich quick initial phase is as a means to mask money transactions. BTC is now a very credible tool for helping money get lost between continents. That is it’s true value at the present time.
Pricing stability and true security is going to be the two essential attributes for any crypto wanting to properly enter the mainstream as an actual currency. My personal opinion is that this will happen. Cryptos are here to stay and will mature to be credible consumer currencies but only once a legitimacy has been brought in which means ‘onshoring’ of key elements of the transaction and storage process which obviously flies in the face of the basic concept of the typical coin. But it will happen.
coyft said:
Pricing stability and security are two aspects, but surely transaction time and costs are other essential functions of money. If it takes 10 minutes to verify a transaction then how can it ever enter the mainstream?
What merchant or consumer is going to wait 10 minutes?
Did you read my response to the same point you made earlier today?What merchant or consumer is going to wait 10 minutes?
coyft said:
DonkeyApple said:
There are different ways to lose market share though. At this stage of the crypto market you would categorically expect BTC to lose share in percentage terms as other coins are continually coming to market.
The key metric is the daily transaction volume growth rather than looking at % of market share as you know the latter must fall even if BTC is growing.
If you drill down through all the hype the typical transaction size of the average punter is wholly negligible. Most punters are playing with pennies. The real use of a coin beyond the get rich quick initial phase is as a means to mask money transactions. BTC is now a very credible tool for helping money get lost between continents. That is it’s true value at the present time.
Pricing stability and true security is going to be the two essential attributes for any crypto wanting to properly enter the mainstream as an actual currency. My personal opinion is that this will happen. Cryptos are here to stay and will mature to be credible consumer currencies but only once a legitimacy has been brought in which means ‘onshoring’ of key elements of the transaction and storage process which obviously flies in the face of the basic concept of the typical coin. But it will happen.
Pricing stability and security are two aspects, but surely transaction time and costs are other essential functions of money. If it takes 10 minutes to verify a transaction then how can it ever enter the mainstream?The key metric is the daily transaction volume growth rather than looking at % of market share as you know the latter must fall even if BTC is growing.
If you drill down through all the hype the typical transaction size of the average punter is wholly negligible. Most punters are playing with pennies. The real use of a coin beyond the get rich quick initial phase is as a means to mask money transactions. BTC is now a very credible tool for helping money get lost between continents. That is it’s true value at the present time.
Pricing stability and true security is going to be the two essential attributes for any crypto wanting to properly enter the mainstream as an actual currency. My personal opinion is that this will happen. Cryptos are here to stay and will mature to be credible consumer currencies but only once a legitimacy has been brought in which means ‘onshoring’ of key elements of the transaction and storage process which obviously flies in the face of the basic concept of the typical coin. But it will happen.
What merchant or consumer is going to wait 10 minutes?
How can pricing stability be achieved when the supply is limited? Where is the incentive to spend it?
What I find interesting is that we offer instant execution on BTC CFDs by using our B book and effectively holding a pool of both otc contracts, ie the book itself and a physical pool. Liquidity remains an issue because ultimately we don’t want to be holding much physical BTC as there is no credible mechanism by which this holding can be either underwritten or totally secure. However, it does deliver a BTC product that has instant execution and within a tax free and FCA and FSCC wrapper. But while there is zero interest from the younger demographic at this stage, it does highlight that onshoring it almost certainly the only means by which security and credibility can reach the levels required for a crypto to become an actual currency.
coyft said:
The other problem is that as the supply is limited there is no incentive to exchanging it for goods and services. You may as well hang onto it, 'cause they ain't making anymore.
I don't think this is a problem.A good chunk of society has limited patience for financial growth and an insatiable appetite for possessions. Far too few invest for their future & instead get a PCP with balloon payment for a new beemer.
People will always buy the things they need. If they think twice about buying things they can't afford & overwhelming themselves with debt, I see positives.
Meantime, it's worth pointing out that Bitcoin is inflationary until around 2040, because they are still making more.
coyft said:
I'm not sure what "onshoring" has to do with credibility. I thought the whole point of Crypto was that it was a trustless currency, not needing an intermediary is its raison d'être and competitive advantage.
I think the problem is more fundamental. In order for it to become money it has to be an effective medium of exchange. That is never going to happen as long as transaction times are counted in minutes. The other problem is that as the supply is limited there is no incentive to exchanging it for goods and services. You may as well hang onto it, 'cause they ain't making anymore.
Given those problems is it really an asset class? If it doesn't derive its value from a medium of exchange, then where is the intrinsic value?
Same as many asset classes, a perception of value etc. I think the problem is more fundamental. In order for it to become money it has to be an effective medium of exchange. That is never going to happen as long as transaction times are counted in minutes. The other problem is that as the supply is limited there is no incentive to exchanging it for goods and services. You may as well hang onto it, 'cause they ain't making anymore.
Given those problems is it really an asset class? If it doesn't derive its value from a medium of exchange, then where is the intrinsic value?
Onshoring as in bringing the holding, exchange and transaction element into the official market place. That’s the only way you can achieve the stability and credibility to allow instantaneous execution and also treat it as a currency. While it remains outside of the ‘system’ it will only ever be used for a small number of transaction types and by a particular group of people.
That’s the whole dichotomy. In order to achieve a genuine status and use as a currency then it needs to effectively transaction a recognised exchange, which as you highlight somewhat undoes the anarchic basis for crypto currencies. But what we are really looking at today is cryptos V1 and like an Indie band that pisses off its 5 original fans by becoming mainstream, so will plenty of punters squeal when V2 of the crypto currency world does the same thing.
DonkeyApple said:
NickCQ said:
Under 30's (and I am one so feel qualified to comment) have grown up in the era with the strongest consumer protections ever, which cover every facet of our lives.
We haven't had that much experience of being scammed and more importantly we think that it's someone else's fault if we do - where's my compensation, why didn't the government protect me from the nasty man that lied to me?
Therefore, we don't anticipate the probability of being ripped off and don't really think of it as our responsibility to avoid anyway. Combine that with a social media-let get-rich-quick-without-hard-work culture, we are sitting ducks.
That could be a very valid aspect. There is so much protection now in the conventional consumer market place that as you say, younger people simply may not have built up that natural wariness. Plus, the whole compensation structure behind the legitimate consumer market probably gives an entire impression that it doesn’t matter if you lose money because there will be an organisation that will give it all back to you. We haven't had that much experience of being scammed and more importantly we think that it's someone else's fault if we do - where's my compensation, why didn't the government protect me from the nasty man that lied to me?
Therefore, we don't anticipate the probability of being ripped off and don't really think of it as our responsibility to avoid anyway. Combine that with a social media-let get-rich-quick-without-hard-work culture, we are sitting ducks.
And definitely, the get rich quick hoopla plays hugely into the hands of people who seem to believe all the lifestyle lies on social media.
For decades I’ve seen the same scamming mechanisms run on numerous markets from gold, wines, penny shares but the binary betting scams were the first that saw these completely standard investment scams being soaked up by enormous numbers of people who never previously would have been targetable in the first instance and in the second instance never have the wealth to make targeting them even viable. The crypto market has turbo boosted even that. It is genuinely unbelievable how a hugely niaive section of society combined with being able to target them easily and cheaply and them having access to spending power has all come together to create a massive epidemic.
Plus remember that a lot of the 30 year olds will have not been ripped off before in these types of investments. In the past when it happened it would be less public. Now it's done in social media. Once they have learned the lesson they are older and so not in the 20-30 range, and so more mature. A bit like many people start out with AIM stocks to get rich quick, do day trading etc. Then over time they learn it was stupid and so move into the "real" investment.
DonkeyApple said:
So, you’re in complete agreement. You could also argue that it is the same as it has always been and that they are not genericially different from any human that has ever existed. Ie laziness + greed = scammed.
So what if one generation is not as wealthy as another? Is that a genuine reason to be ignorant or greedy? That’s an insane perspective.
You mention the financial markets screwing them over for ten years? How? With cheap debt? That’s also a bafflingly illogical excuse.
Having lived through the credit crunch and seen the risks and dangers you would expect the group to be wiser and more savvy as a result. With the endless access to free information and learning you would expect the group to be so much wiser.
The fact that you open with blaming the financial system shows the huge lack of comprehension of the basics and is a strange outlook.
But your post doesn’t counter my point just suggests a theory as to why it might be correct.
We will all watch the crypto market evolve and for V2.0 to be born but what we know is that most participants will have lost money and that everyone will talk about the few who made lots. It’s absolutely no different from every market that has gone before but the financial niaivity combined with social media access of the consumer means it is going to be bigger than any that has gone before
I think we may be coming at this from different ways... So what if one generation is not as wealthy as another? Is that a genuine reason to be ignorant or greedy? That’s an insane perspective.
You mention the financial markets screwing them over for ten years? How? With cheap debt? That’s also a bafflingly illogical excuse.
Having lived through the credit crunch and seen the risks and dangers you would expect the group to be wiser and more savvy as a result. With the endless access to free information and learning you would expect the group to be so much wiser.
The fact that you open with blaming the financial system shows the huge lack of comprehension of the basics and is a strange outlook.
But your post doesn’t counter my point just suggests a theory as to why it might be correct.
We will all watch the crypto market evolve and for V2.0 to be born but what we know is that most participants will have lost money and that everyone will talk about the few who made lots. It’s absolutely no different from every market that has gone before but the financial niaivity combined with social media access of the consumer means it is going to be bigger than any that has gone before
The fact this generation is poorer than their parents matters hugely, because it doesnt give them an incentive to work harder if the odds and policies are stacked against them. The current government, under the guise of austerity has hammered the young and the working class while at the same time protecting high earners and pensioners. The triple lock pension system has cost the country billions while at the same time graduates are leaving uni with 50k of debt and families living in council houses are having some of their benefits removed. You may not see this as an issue (I dare say you're middle age or older and probably comfortably well off), but to the youth it does matter. Its about how they see the world and the psychology of what they perceive as a system rigged against them, which builds frustration.
The financial system has screwed them over - they see the crash in 2008 as being created by rich bankers, who then got bailed out by the government, while their public services have been cut right back, jobs were lost, and smaller local business went bust. Then for the following 10 years there have been 0 returns on savings, so no incentive to save. Anyone under the age of 30 has only every seen low interest rates and cheap debt in their adult lives. You may say its an illogical excuse, but its not at all. You're simply not looking at the bigger picture.
Huge amounts of information, as the world is waking up to, is more harmful than helpful because it is human nature to believe what you want and read what you already believe in. You can find both sides to any argument on the internet, and so to assume people are going to seek out the truth, or what is advertised as the truth, while ignoring everything else is either naive or ignorant.
What it comes down to is greed. Greed in a world which (seemingly) offers quick riches, while at the same time the 'real world' is ever more stacked against young working class people doing well. It is hardly surprising they turn to the 'get rick quick' scams.
But dont take my word for it, it has been well documented that social mobility has decreased, that this generation will be poorer than their parents, that houses as a proportion of earning is higher than ever, and that the wealth gap between the older and younger generations is increasing. If you put yourself in the shoes of an 18 year old living on a council estate with £500 in his pocket, wouldnt you take the chance to try and earn some quick money as a way of getting out your situation and experiencing things they would never hope to do otherwise?
coyft said:
I don't follow your logic. If Bitcoin was the only choice then I might agree, but it isn't. Why would someone choose a currency that appreciates in value, when they could use fiat money which depreciates?
Out of necessity. If your need to release value, you sell your assets wherever they are held.coyft said:
If you believe that Bitcoin will become a functioning currency then logic would dictate that it will appreciate until all the coins have been mined. I don't see how it could be inflationary.
Supply increases until the 21 million limit, therefore it's an inflationary currency until then.
coyft said:
The only value Bitcoin possesses is in its potential to become real money, used by real people that buy real goods and services. But as I've pointed out there is no incentive for anyone to use it in that way.
The initial use case is store of value. Medium of exchange and then unit of account come much later in the adoption curve as infrastructure & acceptance grow. All three are properties of money but you can't possibly expect a radical innovation like Bitcoin to exhibit them all at once, fully fledged, immediately.Thesprucegoose said:
You write interchangeable about global macroeconomics and uk ones. Young people being worse off than their parents is a global issue.
I do, and it is. And both are affecting UK communities equally, the fact it is a worldwide issue doesnt make it any less relevant.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff