Crypto Currency Thread (Vol.2)

[tertius]

Gweeds said:

https://hbr.org/2022/05/cautionary-tales-from-cryp...

Stackpole: One of the most surprising (to me, anyway) arguments you make is that Web3 could be a disaster for privacy and create major issues around harassment. Why? And does it feel like the companies “buying into” Web3 are aware of this?

White: Blockchains are immutable, which means once data is recorded, it can’t be removed. [...] Many blockchains also have a very public record of transactions: Anyone can see that a person made a transaction and the details of that transaction. Privacy is theoretically provided through pseudonymity — wallets are identified by a string of characters that aren’t inherently tied to a person. But because you’ll likely use one wallet for most of your transactions, keeping one’s wallet address private can be both challenging and a lot of work and is likely to only become more challenging if this future vision of crypto ubiquity is realized. If a person’s wallet address is known and they are using a popular chain like Ethereum to transact, anyone [else] can see all transactions they’ve made.

Imagine if you went on a first date, and when you paid them back for your half of the meal, they could now see every other transaction you’d ever made — not just the public transactions on some app you used to transfer the cash but any transactions: the split checks with all of your previous dates, that monthly transfer to your therapist, the debts you’re paying off (or not), the charities to which you’re donating (or not), the amount you’re putting in a retirement account (or not). What if they could see the location of the corner store by your apartment where you so frequently go to grab a pint of ice cream at 10 PM?

Not quite the utopia you might like to pretend.

White is clearly someone who doesn’t understand the difference between a wallet and an address.

[dimots]

Good contributions dmahon!

[Gweeds]

tertius said:

White is clearly someone who doesn’t understand the difference between a wallet and an address.

I think it’s pretty safe to say she knows what she’s talking about.

[Gweeds]

WY86 said:

I also remember the millennium bug… going wipe out all electronics how did that turn out? Covid was going to kill us all? Bitcoin will never get to 1, 10, 100….

This also implies that it has taken fully over from FIAT currency which the aim of most cryptos is not to do.

Edited by WY86 on Friday 20th May 18:03

Because no work was done to counter Y2K of course.

And that’s odd, because it seems to me that you’re clearly advocating for crypto to do just that.

[WY86]

Gweeds said:

I think it’s pretty safe to say she knows what she’s talking about.

Of course, you can also find positive articles on that site for web3.0 and crypto.. but we will forget about them.

[Gweeds]

WY86 said:

Of course, you can also find positive articles on that site for web3.0 and crypto.. but we will forget about them.

I’m sure we can.

The existence of otherwise shouldn’t dent your belief system though.

[tertius]

Gweeds said:

tertius said:

White is clearly someone who doesn’t understand the difference between a wallet and an address.

I think it’s pretty safe to say she knows what she’s talking about.

Well she’s managed to disguise it pretty well in that extract then.

For example: “White: … wallets are identified by a string of characters ...”

No they aren’t, an address is identified by a character string not a wallet. A wallet is simply a piece of software that helps manage the keys which in turn control addresses in a human friendly fashion. You can manage the same addresses with multiple different wallets. Or even with no wallet at all.

The situation being discussed is address re-use, whereby if you use the same address for multiple payments you open up the possibility of exposing your transaction history. However, this is trivial to avoid.

[WY86]

Gweeds said:

Because no work was done to counter Y2K of course.

And that’s odd, because it seems to me that you’re clearly advocating for crypto to do just that.

Again not all crypto has been designed as a currency replacement, and seeing as i do not hold bitcoin I'm
Clearly not advocating that.

So many bitter people that are clearly annoyed that even in a bear market bitcoins value is still 50x compared to their share prices.

[Zumbruk]

WY86 said:

I also remember the millennium bug… going wipe out all electronics how did that turn out?

The thousands of people who worked very hard (on top of their normal jobs) to make sure nothing happened will be delighted to know how much their efforts are appreciated by the know-nothings.

[zedmtrappe]

WY86 said:

I also remember the millennium bug...

Come off it....... you can't be that old.

[Ari]

WY86 said:

Ari said:

Sounds brilliant! How much interest would I make? Presumably it gets paid in actual cash?

I might retire, sounds like I can't lose! I can't lose, can I..?

Why are you asking if I'm Toni or Guy?

all depends on the pairings of what your staking it in, could 10% 20% and in some pairings up to 300%

all investments have risks and you know this.

I invest in the FTSE100 because I know nothing about investing. So compared to that, how much risk? Twice as much? Three times?

Because 300% sounds pretty good to me. Too good to be true, you might say...

You didn't answer why you were asking if I were Toni or Guy?

[WY86]

Ari said:

I invest in the FTSE100 because I know nothing about investing. So compared to that, how much risk? Twice as much? Three times?

Because 300% sounds pretty good to me. Too good to be true, you might say...

You didn't answer why you were asking if I were Toni or Guy?

It was a quip about your car history.

Its very much true, but as you state about your limited knowledge on investing and even less about crypto probably wise you sit this one out.

[Camelot1971]

WY86 said:

..your limited knowledge on investing and even less about crypto probably wise you sit this one out.

Irony at its absolute finest.

[WY86]

Camelot1971 said:

Irony at its absolute finest.

Yawn

[r3g]

Strongblock is soft rugging. Treasury depleted. RIP.. I predicted this back in January but got shouted down in the youtube comments.

https://strongblock.com/announcements.html

Edited by r3g on Sunday 22 May 07:37

[rodericb]

moonigan said:

Gweeds said:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/05/why-this-co...

“Despite being hyped in expensive Super Bowl ads, cryptocurrency is now having a difficult moment. As the New York Times reports, “the crypto world went into a full meltdown this week in a sell-off that graphically illustrated the risks of the experimental and unregulated digital currencies.” One of cryptocurrency’s most vocal skeptics is Nicholas Weaver, senior staff researcher at the International Computer Science Institute and lecturer in the computer science department at UC Berkeley. Weaver has studied cryptocurrencies for years. Speaking with Current Affairs editor-in-chief Nathan J. Robinson, Prof. Weaver explains why he views the much-hyped technology with such antipathy. He argues that cryptocurrency is useless and destructive, and should “die in a fire….”

Pretty much every ‘benefit’ touted in the PR lines trotted out in this thread are dismantled one by one.

And this chap has likely forgotten more than most people know.

It was an interesting read, enlightening.

Enlightening indeed. Forgive the impending crudeness but that guy has his dick so far up some hole he'll be chopping off his legs and going all in. A fire and brimstone rock and roll preacher from the pulpit of the church of whatever-the-fk-that's-all-about. A lot of the hyperbole he's hyperventilating is pretty much what I read on The Internet twenty years ago, about the banking system, governments blah blah blah and which Bitcoin was eventually concocted up as an experiement by some nutcases to rail against the system.

Now that electric Jesus is starting to look outside his wheelhouse the establishment is on attack mode. I wonder when Go Fund Me is going to take back the money for the couch electric jesus's disciples donated for?

[rodericb]

Condi said:

WY86 said:

I feel your moving the goal posts, i would say some
Crypto has more intrinsic value based on what the capabilities of the software its built upon. You cannot blanket statement crypto because they all have different use cases.

If a share crashes to zero it has no intrinsic value you can’t sell it for scrap paper it is worthless.

Not moving any goal posts, the intrinsic value of the share at any point in time is exactly what I said it is. It entirely depends on the assets and liabilities of the company you are investing it. The value moves around and can of course be 0, ala Enron and many other companies which have gone bust, but that doesnt mean that the intrinsic value of all shares is 0.

The other point I should have made before is the acknowledgement of risk you are taking on. Shares pay dividends, on the whole, and buying debt pays interest. This is a return for the risk that the company goes bust or the debt doesn't get repaid. With crypto your only "out" is hoping that someone else pays more for it than you did; there is no return for the risk of it going down. Aka the greater fool theory.

A good chunk of any intrinsic value in shares is that there's an industry around manipulating it to extract value out of suckers. They don't want to destroy that money making machine. Or sometimes they go off-script like in the case of Gamestop and someone notices it and does something about it.

Edited by rodericb on Sunday 22 May 13:34

[Ari]

WY86 said:

Ari said:

I invest in the FTSE100 because I know nothing about investing. So compared to that, how much risk? Twice as much? Three times?

Because 300% sounds pretty good to me. Too good to be true, you might say...

You didn't answer why you were asking if I were Toni or Guy?

It was a quip about your car history.

Its very much true, but as you state about your limited knowledge on investing and even less about crypto probably wise you sit this one out.

Yes, though that was about the level we were dealing with here. Maybe you should stick to Top Gear reruns...

[Ari]

WY86 said:

So many bitter people that are clearly annoyed that even in a bear market bitcoins value is still 50x compared to their share prices.

Eh? How on earth do you figure that one out?

[Chamon_Lee]

WY86 said:

Condi said:

This post is one of the best on here recently. Very pragmatic. Most people who talk about how great crypto is are simply talking their book. They need an increasing number of buyers to fuel the system and allow them to make a profit. All this nonsense about use cases and how much the future relies on crypto is quite clearly nonsense because over 10 years after Bitcoin was first used to buy a pizza the number of places which accept it as a currency is tiny and whichever way you look at it, it has totally failed as a medium of exchange. When something truly revolutionary comes along which is as scalable as crypto, it doesn't take 10 years for people to see the benefits and start using it.

you know what the beautiful thing is it will slowly filter into your life and you won't even realize, that behind that contract or license agreement is a blockchain recording it and storing that information.

What i actually see from all this belittling is a generation a little afraid that something they don't understand is gaining traction and are not able to leverage it to make smart investments.

im sure your aware that blockchain is one thing and cryptocurrency is another. All of the cryptocurrencies could dissapear and we could still use the blockchain technology for information recording? Even then as others have said there might be more efficent ways of doing that rather than using blockchain anyway.

All this "ICO" crap is really just a funding vehicle without any ownership in the company. Its basically to by pass the laws that exist.