Great timing in answer to the question what is crypto and what is it for?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9XAxNRXLvQ&t=807s

Two hour podcast with Haralabos Voulgaris talking about why he likes crypto. Some fun gambling stories thrown in there too. For those that don't know him. He is/was a big sports bettor. Also a poker player. The last few years he worked as a coach for an NBA team.

In the early days he got paid a lot of his gambling winnings in crypto, especially from Chinese people and it was so easy compared to in FIAT and how much would get vigged by financial institutions. He is quite suspicious of NFTs, though he has quite a few.

He really likes cryptopunks. He thinks some of the cachet of them comes from the story of how they were made and given away. Some with Bitcoin, it was made with an ideology, so this gives it value compared to the other coins. I didn't really think of that one but it is a good point.

He also talks about the influence of the US Central bank and other national banks and how that is bad and dangerous for people. And it is good to have an alternative type of money that doesn't have that which you can choose to use/hold if you like.

To RickBFA, I would say that Bitcoin is bluechip at this point. It is very trustworthy. Large financial institutions are getting involved and holding it. It is very solid just because of how it is created and the fact that nobody controls it.

duplicate post

If you view NFTs in a similar way to a piece of art, I think that is a fair comparison and makes a bit more sense. In my opinion, art really doesn't have much benefit to society apart from people think it looks nice, or maybe even beautiful. It certainly isn't worth the amount that a lot of people pay for it.There are a lot of NFTs being created by artists, they are then selling them on forums on OpenSea and making a living.

Some of the NFTs are actually really creative. Even some of the avatar type things are quite fun. A game like Sorare is fun because it is fantasy football.

But yes a majority of NFTs are absolute shite just jumping on the bandwagon. But in my opinion, a majority of art is also absolute shite, so there we go. A lot of NFTs are just digital art.

Something like a cryptopunk is now basically like a digital asset. Compare it to a diamond for example in my opinion.

What is the benefit of art apart from enriching the original creators? Same thing really. But nobody says art is dangerous when you go and overpay for some crappy painting.
/
The whole concept of collectability is an interesting one isn't it? It is like what do rich people do with their surplus income? Do they donate it to charity or do something useful with it, or do they spend it 'collecting' some random thing and then just storing it in their house and occasionally looking at it.

Conclusion. I think NFTs are stupid. I also think art is stupid.

Crypto itself though is not stupid.

Seems to me that NFT is just crypto with a smiley attached. So,

What is crypto if it’s not just an NFT that doesn’t have any claim to artistic merit?

If you aren't convinced by crypto yet, then I am not sure I am going to manage to do it right now in this thread!

I am by no means and evangelist but I hate being screwed over by banks, I hate exchanging currency and being vigged by currency exchange firms and also by banks. It is a de-centralised form of money that you can use all around the world and you can have varying degrees of anonymity depending on which coin you use and fees can also be very low. In the neighbourhood where I live in Berlin there are quite a few places you can pay with crypto.

One only needs to look at the likes of Visa and Mastercard and how they can just ban people on a whim or bowing to religious zealots for example to think that having a decentralised alternative with nobody controlling it is needed. Have a read about Exodus Cry. What I would consider an extreme religious group who puts pressure on Visa and MasterCard to ban certain groups of people from using their services and as these two companies are a semi-monopoly

Just one take on crypto. There are many more avenues and uses, I am not an expert or super knowledgeable or anything.

If you view NFTs in a similar way to a piece of art, I think that is a fair comparison and makes a bit more sense. In my opinion, art really doesn't have much benefit to society apart from people think it looks nice, or maybe even beautiful. It certainly isn't worth the amount that a lot of people pay for it.There are a lot of NFTs being created by artists, they are then selling them on forums on OpenSea and making a living.

Some of the NFTs are actually really creative. Even some of the avatar type things are quite fun. A game like Sorare is fun because it is fantasy football.

But yes a majority of NFTs are absolute shite just jumping on the bandwagon. But in my opinion, a majority of art is also absolute shite, so there we go. A lot of NFTs are just digital art.

Something like a cryptopunk is now basically like a digital asset. Compare it to a diamond for example in my opinion.

What is the benefit of art apart from enriching the original creators? Same thing really. But nobody says art is dangerous when you go and overpay for some crappy painting.
/
The whole concept of collectability is an interesting one isn't it? It is like what do rich people do with their surplus income? Do they donate it to charity or do something useful with it, or do they spend it 'collecting' some random thing and then just storing it in their house and occasionally looking at it.

Conclusion. I think NFTs are stupid. I also think art is stupid.

Crypto itself though is not stupid.

Is Soare just like fooptball index?

The game is different. A key point is the scarcity of the cards and there can only ever be a certain amount of each type.

 It is a bit like fantasy football or DFS but you pay all of your entry fees up front.

I'd say it has more legitimacy than Football Index in terms of the investors behind the project such as Softbank and other venture capital firms (Disclaimer - I never played Football Index). I like the team who run it but it could certainly go tits up like any Cyrpto project. I wouldn't recommend anyone invest in it off the street, BUT if you are going to invest in some kind of crypto project then this is one of the more robust ones and you can make an income each week and slowly get your investment back. It is also a bit of a hedge against the volitility of Ethereum. So if you have a bunch of ETH, you could put a bit of it into the game and get some cards.

If you view NFTs in a similar way to a piece of art, I think that is a fair comparison and makes a bit more sense. In my opinion, art really doesn't have much benefit to society apart from people think it looks nice, or maybe even beautiful. It certainly isn't worth the amount that a lot of people pay for it.There are a lot of NFTs being created by artists, they are then selling them on forums on OpenSea and making a living.

Some of the NFTs are actually really creative. Even some of the avatar type things are quite fun. A game like Sorare is fun because it is fantasy football.

But yes a majority of NFTs are absolute shite just jumping on the bandwagon. But in my opinion, a majority of art is also absolute shite, so there we go. A lot of NFTs are just digital art.

Something like a cryptopunk is now basically like a digital asset. Compare it to a diamond for example in my opinion.

What is the benefit of art apart from enriching the original creators? Same thing really. But nobody says art is dangerous when you go and overpay for some crappy painting.
/
The whole concept of collectability is an interesting one isn't it? It is like what do rich people do with their surplus income? Do they donate it to charity or do something useful with it, or do they spend it 'collecting' some random thing and then just storing it in their house and occasionally looking at it.

Conclusion. I think NFTs are stupid. I also think art is stupid.

Crypto itself though is not stupid.

I would counter by saying the much of the financial sector provides zero benefit to society as do many businesses as a whole including things like bookmakers, share trading companies etc.

What a weird argument. Where is that article from?

You used the term exploitation. But with football teams being sponsored by the likes of payday loans companies and and bookmakers and actually owned by repressive regimes who exploit their population I don't think NFTs are the problem here!

Was it Mickey Wernick and Steffi Graf?

I wonder what 'old school registration' is?

Anyone see this on the BBC a few weeks ago about Paul Merson and gambling addiction. I wondered what people thought of it?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010l43/paul-merson-football-gambling-and-me

Also on youtube for anyone not in the UK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2HxMEoyIKI

It is just the referring to female pundits as one homogeneous entity as if they are all the same and say the same things because they are women.

Much like male pundits. Some female pundits are very good, some are ok and some are bad.

I still don't know why they are spoiling the show. What part of the football watching experience are they spoiling exactly?

Everyone in this forum is in the Stone Age or what?

How many former footballers have had roles as pundits and been absolutely crap. Not even knowing half the players on foreign teams. No insight. Inarticulate. But they played for a big team and have a good agent so they get the gig.

But all women should be banned from being pundits because some are a not that great and inhibit the matey banter? Even though you've named several who you actually think are quite good.

seriously?

I know this isn't PC, but these female soccer pundits that are now everywhere, are totally spoiling the show. Its the same on all the channels.

All the best. Hope it isn't as nasty as it sounds like it might be.

Thread seems to have taken a funny turn since I last posted.

Haven't got time for that right now, just popped in to say Norrie is on Amazon now and Radacanu on about the same time this is due to finish.

Given Hurkacz has lost, I am pretty sure Norrie is top 10 if he wins this and the next game. 

https://live-tennis.eu/en/atp-race

I am getting updates from my mum as I await anambupance

Hoping that isn't as alarming as it sounds and is just a standard trip for you.  Good luck either way. 

The boy is playing very well FWIW.

chest infection and vomiting

Seems like the 1 billion plus vaccines have been a complete waste of time then in your opinion if I have interpreted you correctly. So yeah fair enough

Such a crazy stance since being vaxed doesnt stop you catching it or passing it on and pretty sure these players wont be a drain on any state provided medical care. Is there a logic to this beyond, we're taking this approach with our population so we cant give exemptions to foreigners

Who you getting your medical info from, the towie virologist on Twitter?

Tbf, both you and Bergeroo resorting to ad hominem makes me realise how solid my ground is here :-)

It's a FACT that it doesn't stop you catching Covid.

It's a FACT that you can still be contagious.

It's a FACT that Novicaneovic will be able to afford to go private if he needs any healthcare or more likely, as the strapping epitome of fitness that he is, he aint likely to require hospitalisation.

Natch, yr all quite mad and only Horners comes up with a good reason for 'Good'.

It's a FACT you are less likely to catch it
It's a FACT your less contagious if you have it
Its a FACT not all the tennis players are multi millionaires

now please take your conspiracy theories back to the covid thread

thank you for your time

Such a crazy stance since being vaxed doesnt stop you catching it or passing it on and pretty sure these players wont be a drain on any state provided medical care. Is there a logic to this beyond, we're taking this approach with our population so we cant give exemptions to foreigners

I mean - this thread is going to derail fast - but I think it is pretty widely accepted that having a vaccine makes it harder for you to catch the virus, get affected by it less and therefore less chance to pass it on.

And yeah - why the hell should some tennis player who isn't vaxxed get to go stuff that some member of the Australian population can't do if they aren't vaxxed.

Presumably if any of the players catches Corona than they will need to get medical treatment, and that will be state medical care.

If they do it with tennis then they have to do it with every other sport and every other job? They already got enough heat last year for flying everyone in when Aussies couldn't even get a flight home or a hotel to quarantine.