blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 08:59:12 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272477 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  Official cryptocurrency thread (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Altcoin)
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 ... 88 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Official cryptocurrency thread (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Altcoin)  (Read 302132 times)
SuuPRlim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10536



View Profile
« Reply #735 on: January 16, 2018, 10:57:30 AM »

Dammit
Logged

EvilPie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14253



View Profile
« Reply #736 on: January 16, 2018, 11:16:01 AM »

Dammit

Stay positive Dave. See it as an opportunity to buy more at this crazy low price....

Logged

Motivational speeches at their best:

"Because thats what living is, the 6 inches in front of your face......" - Patrick Leonard - 10th May 2015
SuperJez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


View Profile
« Reply #737 on: January 16, 2018, 11:28:01 AM »

rip
Logged
SuperJez
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


View Profile
« Reply #738 on: January 16, 2018, 11:39:03 AM »

Seriously a 42% drop from £15,000 to £8700 really doesn't matter.   People were screaming OVERVALUED BUBBLE itt @ £2,000 all the way up to £8000.  Going back several years people were screaming the same when it went from 50p to £30.  You could draw the same graph in 2011 as you could in 2017 - people look for patterns and assume they know how to value something which nobody can actually value.  If you call a crash every day you will eventually be correct in any financial market but that doesn't mean you had any special insight.  It always sounds clever to write an article or a post saying how its a bad time to invest in xxx and its overvalued and you dont want to overpay blah blah blah.  Truth is if the underlying is positive (which it is with cryptos as it is with stock markets) you might as well always just invest, leave the money there and not try and be clever.

All that matters is that the underlying technology and potential is still the same and that will, eventually, win the day.  It will always be incredibly volatile until that happens.  It can't be banned or stopped and anyone trying to do that is just wasting a gigantic amount of time and money.  Nobody can place a true value on 1 bitcoin or 1 ether token or whatever all you can do is leave your investments for the very long term.  You shouldn't care about short term volatility as it should not be money you need day to day that you have invested.  These markets are unregulated and highly manipulated, if you try and short term trade you are opening yourself up to being owned by ppl with inside information.
Logged
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #739 on: January 16, 2018, 12:21:59 PM »

If i may, this second para is really dangerously stupid. Crypto may have a huge future value but unless you are holding a balanced portfolio of all crypto and all future crypto and you balance it continually then doing as you've described just means that some people will bet correctly and win and some will bet badly and lose, irrespective of the overall value changes in crypto. Zero guarantee that you will invest profitably just because the market collectively is profitable. It's this kind of really naive view that will result in large losses for many people
« Last Edit: January 16, 2018, 12:25:55 PM by nirvana » Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
Jon MW
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6191



View Profile
« Reply #740 on: January 16, 2018, 12:42:52 PM »

Largely the mainstream media is terrified of crypto. Mainstream media outlets are by and large owned by very rich old white men who are very happy with the status quo which has got them to where they are today. Mainstream media outlets would like to protect the way things are. They don't want a new technology to come in and disrupt and change things drastically. They produce sensationalist articles and play into people's existing confirmation biases. Also note how people who have made a lot of money out of crypto are also ridiculed in the mainstream press - as if that kind of person doesn't deserve to become successful and rich. Decentralised money and the separation of state and money are coming and ten years on from the financial sector being bailed out by world governments, they are now afraid of the speed and the growth of crpyto. Of course what they'd like more than anything is to get in on the action themselves and leverage a position where banks and big business make all the money and get all the benefits.

This is an excellent point.  I've been spending quite a lot of time learning about Crypto and it is does feel to me that there is some kind of agenda in the MSM.  The recent big Crypto stories have been that they are eating up huge amounts of energy and Mr Buffett's comments, mainly in the negative.  I think a lot of it is due to the journalists not really understanding what they are writing about, much like how when a big poker story goes mainstream.

It is a bubble; like the dot com one.  But after that burst no one stopped using the internet, and internet based companies are now valued at even more than their counterparts of the early 2000s.

Sadly I can't be really be an active investor right now, but this is still a technology that is in its infancy and I think it is a prudent measure for anyone to take the time to really try and understand what is going on.  Blockchain is not going away.

Naval is probably my favourite speaker on the technology as a whole and this is a really good and quick watch about the technology.

https://twitter.com/GoldmanSachs/status/951906924240531458

Hey Ryan hows it going?

Interesting comments you make about mainstream media, and I have to say as an active investor during the late 90s I disagree with the comments about rich white men happy with the current status quo. It is not in the media's interest to go against a fad, and that's exactly cryptocurrencies are.

If anything, the media are responsible both now and in the 90s for ramping up the price of each asset to unsustainable levels. When a Daily Mail reader hears about people making millions from buying and holding a basket of coins within a matter of months/a few years, naturally FOMO is going to kick in.

Personally, I take the MSM with a pinch of salt, as I also do the same with reddit. You will learn more on Bloomberg/CNBC about cryptos and get more balanced opinions from their guest analysts ( both for and against).

We work with a few publishers, and while I'd always agree with anyone who suggests that journalists don't usually know much about they're writing about, the idea that anyone is 'terrified' of crypto is pretty laughable.

The publishers we work with, and I'm guessing most of the media, are terrified about the World Wide Web and data protection laws - they're the only things that can damage them.

I noticed Kodak jumped on the bandwagon to say they're going to use blockchain technology to help protect artists rights. This is more the kind of future I'd envision for crypto - i.e. an existing company finding some way to use the technology to their benefit.

What isn't clear yet is whether blockchain technology is actually any better than existing technology - what Kodak is planning, can already be done. Their product has to actually be better than the alternatives for it to help keep blockchain technology relevant. If it is actually better then I wouldn't be surprised if Apple, Google, Amazon and the banks found a way to utilize it in some way - but I haven't seen any concrete example of how this is the case yet.
Logged

Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2011 blonde MTT League August Champion
2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain  - - runners up - -
5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
acegooner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 187


View Profile
« Reply #741 on: January 16, 2018, 12:49:58 PM »

Seriously a 42% drop from £15,000 to £8700 really doesn't matter.   People were screaming OVERVALUED BUBBLE itt @ £2,000 all the way up to £8000.  Going back several years people were screaming the same when it went from 50p to £30.  You could draw the same graph in 2011 as you could in 2017 - people look for patterns and assume they know how to value something which nobody can actually value.  If you call a crash every day you will eventually be correct in any financial market but that doesn't mean you had any special insight.  It always sounds clever to write an article or a post saying how its a bad time to invest in xxx and its overvalued and you dont want to overpay blah blah blah.  Truth is if the underlying is positive (which it is with cryptos as it is with stock markets) you might as well always just invest, leave the money there and not try and be clever.

All that matters is that the underlying technology and potential is still the same and that will, eventually, win the day.  It will always be incredibly volatile until that happens.  It can't be banned or stopped and anyone trying to do that is just wasting a gigantic amount of time and money.  Nobody can place a true value on 1 bitcoin or 1 ether token or whatever all you can do is leave your investments for the very long term.  You shouldn't care about short term volatility as it should not be money you need day to day that you have invested.  These markets are unregulated and highly manipulated, if you try and short term trade you are opening yourself up to being owned by ppl with inside information.

The underlying technology and valuations are two totally separate things. The technology could succeed and the price be much lower than it is now.

You also say it can't be banned, of course it can. If there is a consensus amongst governments that digital currency cannot be considered as legal tender then it makes any crypto portfolio worthless. The reality is that this won't happen. Perhaps this because governments/central banks can see blockchain has real life uses.

However, governments will not allow the current status quo to exist in a relatively unregulated environment, especially if it puts their economies in jeopardy of future systemic risks in a similar way that banks reckless lending nearly brought the whole financial system down a decade ago. People are buying cryptos using credit cards, that is a fact and something that anyone invested in this space should worry about (its classic bubble behaviour). China's economy is heavily leveraged, both at government and individual level and something that not only crypto investors should be worried about.

Risk, be it systemic, investment or geopolitical is something that most crypto investors don't consider when making investments. It's all about the $$$. What happened today isn't a crash, it's not even close.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2018, 12:55:12 PM by acegooner » Logged
Jamier-Host
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1834



View Profile WWW
« Reply #742 on: January 16, 2018, 12:55:03 PM »

People are buying cryptos using credit cards, that is a fact and something that anyone invested in this space should worry about.

Yes, this is bad. I feel the same about gambling on sports/casino/poker with credit.

As I said before, it's the random masses coming along for the ride with money they don't really have spare to "invest" that will get burnt. Sure, some will get lucky and get the lot, but there will be many more sad stories of people going bust.
Logged

Side Project - making games for Amazon Alexa devices

pressthe8.com
acegooner
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 187


View Profile
« Reply #743 on: January 16, 2018, 02:24:39 PM »

Largely the mainstream media is terrified of crypto. Mainstream media outlets are by and large owned by very rich old white men who are very happy with the status quo which has got them to where they are today. Mainstream media outlets would like to protect the way things are. They don't want a new technology to come in and disrupt and change things drastically. They produce sensationalist articles and play into people's existing confirmation biases. Also note how people who have made a lot of money out of crypto are also ridiculed in the mainstream press - as if that kind of person doesn't deserve to become successful and rich. Decentralised money and the separation of state and money are coming and ten years on from the financial sector being bailed out by world governments, they are now afraid of the speed and the growth of crpyto. Of course what they'd like more than anything is to get in on the action themselves and leverage a position where banks and big business make all the money and get all the benefits.

This is an excellent point.  I've been spending quite a lot of time learning about Crypto and it is does feel to me that there is some kind of agenda in the MSM.  The recent big Crypto stories have been that they are eating up huge amounts of energy and Mr Buffett's comments, mainly in the negative.  I think a lot of it is due to the journalists not really understanding what they are writing about, much like how when a big poker story goes mainstream.

It is a bubble; like the dot com one.  But after that burst no one stopped using the internet, and internet based companies are now valued at even more than their counterparts of the early 2000s.

Sadly I can't be really be an active investor right now, but this is still a technology that is in its infancy and I think it is a prudent measure for anyone to take the time to really try and understand what is going on.  Blockchain is not going away.

Naval is probably my favourite speaker on the technology as a whole and this is a really good and quick watch about the technology.

https://twitter.com/GoldmanSachs/status/951906924240531458

Hey Ryan hows it going?

Interesting comments you make about mainstream media, and I have to say as an active investor during the late 90s I disagree with the comments about rich white men happy with the current status quo. It is not in the media's interest to go against a fad, and that's exactly cryptocurrencies are.

If anything, the media are responsible both now and in the 90s for ramping up the price of each asset to unsustainable levels. When a Daily Mail reader hears about people making millions from buying and holding a basket of coins within a matter of months/a few years, naturally FOMO is going to kick in.

Personally, I take the MSM with a pinch of salt, as I also do the same with reddit. You will learn more on Bloomberg/CNBC about cryptos and get more balanced opinions from their guest analysts ( both for and against).

We work with a few publishers, and while I'd always agree with anyone who suggests that journalists don't usually know much about they're writing about, the idea that anyone is 'terrified' of crypto is pretty laughable.

The publishers we work with, and I'm guessing most of the media, are terrified about the World Wide Web and data protection laws - they're the only things that can damage them.

I noticed Kodak jumped on the bandwagon to say they're going to use blockchain technology to help protect artists rights. This is more the kind of future I'd envision for crypto - i.e. an existing company finding some way to use the technology to their benefit.

What isn't clear yet is whether blockchain technology is actually any better than existing technology - what Kodak is planning, can already be done. Their product has to actually be better than the alternatives for it to help keep blockchain technology relevant. If it is actually better then I wouldn't be surprised if Apple, Google, Amazon and the banks found a way to utilize it in some way - but I haven't seen any concrete example of how this is the case yet.

Great article here about this. It's like in the 90s when you added the name .com to your company and watched the share price rocket. Long Island Iced Tea company changes its name to Long Blockchain and the share price of a loss-making company shoots up 289%, really!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/a-fool-s-bet-maybe-but-sharks-fuel-crypto-mania-stock-rallies

The more I read about blockchain, the more similarities I see with the tech boom/bust.
Logged
Jon MW
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6191



View Profile
« Reply #744 on: January 16, 2018, 04:11:02 PM »

 Click to see full-size image.


It's from a marketing place - but seems pretty universal at the moment
Logged

Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2011 blonde MTT League August Champion
2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain  - - runners up - -
5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
lucky_scrote
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3531



View Profile
« Reply #745 on: January 16, 2018, 05:44:02 PM »

This is old but still a good read.

Quote
An Open Letter to Peter Schiff A follow-up to the discussion on the Peter Schiff Show, December 2, 2013 (this has been emailed to Peter just now)

Dear Peter,

It was a privilege and an honor to be a guest on your radio show today. I’ve been a fan of yours for more than five years; you were one of the reasons I discovered Austrian economics (and, in turn, Bitcoin), and your eloquent explanation of consumption vs. production in an economy has guided my outlook of the world ever since. So thank you sincerely for what you’ve taught me, and for the opportunity to appear on your show. It was a really special moment for me.

While we had some valuable discussion today, I felt a follow-up was appropriate to better articulate my points. You’re right to be highly skeptical of such a new technology and monetary system, but please take the time to ensure your skepticism doesn’t blind you from what I humbly suggest is one of the most important tools for human freedom ever conceived.

The Fundamentals

First, Bitcoin must always be considered as two things: the payment network (Bitcoin) and the currency units (bitcoins). Condemnations of the latter can often be resolved with an understanding of the former. Satoshi should have named them differently to avoid this initial confusion.

When you suggest that bitcoins have “zero intrinsic value,” you are only considering the currency unit itself and ignoring the payment network. While I prefer the term “utility” over “intrinsic value” (because all value is subjective to the valuer), I may indeed admit that bitcoins, as currency units all by themselves, have no fundamental utility and are completely uninteresting. But – and this absolutely critical – the payment network has vast utility.

In fact, this network is probably one of the most valuable and consequential technologies currently on the planet. Some of us realized this a few years ago. Others are realizing it now. Many more will realize it in the future. The Bitcoin network is, fundamentally, a ledger of title controlled by no man. Ponder that for a moment. The transmission of value and ownership has thus just been severed from the State, not by impotent voting, but by the technological achievement of man.

Now, during the show, you agreed that perhaps this payment network has utility. So, if the network (Bitcoin) has utility, and only one currency is accepted on this network (bitcoins), and those bitcoins are scarce, then should not those units themselves command a market price? Who knows what that price should be, but there should be a price, no?

Any good that is useful and scarce will have a price (consider that air is useful but not scarce, and fish with three eyes are scarce but not useful, thus no price for either of them). Because the Bitcoin network is useful, and because only scarce bitcoin currency units are permitted on this network, the bitcoins themselves have a price. Indeed, they must have a price until the network is no longer useful, or the coins are no longer scarce.

This is not magic. It is not a Ponzi scheme or elaborate fraud. It’s just the market pricing something that it finds useful. As the network grows in usage, its utility subsequently grows, and thus scarce bitcoins appreciate further. Those who grabbed coins in the early days benefit hugely, just as those prospectors grabbing nuggets of gold out of the California foot hills did in the early days of the gold rush. Gold is not a pyramid scheme merely because early acquirers profit from later subsequent adoption and demand.

The Utility of Bitcoin and Competitors

So to adequately claim that bitcoins ought to have no price (which is the implicit assumption from your claim on national television that Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme), you must demonstrate that the Bitcoin network has no utility. As someone who has transferred $100,000 worth of value to another person instantly in another country (on a Sunday when banks were closed, no less), I am confident that you will not succeed in this demonstration.

I believe that you will understand and agree with my above arguments if you objectively ponder them for a while. Your contention then moves to the following: that if Bitcoin (the network) can be replicated by anyone, it isn’t actually scarce at all and thus even though the network is valuable, the price of individual coins will fall toward zero as the system is replicated over and over by competitors. You would explain that while bitcoins are limited to 21 million units, anyone can create a competing crypto-currency and thus the number of possible crypto-currency units are unlimited, thus not scarce, and thus not fundamentally worth anything.

You made this argument several times on the show today. It is a fair point for you to raise, but please allow me to counter it.

Bitcoin, after all, cannot really be copied. True, the open-source code can be copied and the copier could release CopyCoin (indeed this is happening all the time). But, the copier cannot copy the infrastructure. The protocol layer is easily copied. The infrastructure layer is not. On Day 1 of Bitcoin, it had no infrastructure layer. I can tell you, as an entrepreneur in this space for the past few years, Bitcoin’s infrastructure layer is now substantial. Indeed, I am sitting in my office, and looking at my employees building this very infrastructure as I write this. Their work, and that of many thousands of others around the world, is not so easily replicated.

Let’s use an analogy, which you so often convincingly do when describing the absurdity of Fed policy or the counter-productive nature of various government programs. I believe the following is a very fair analogy.

Consider that language itself is a protocol – a set of rules for conveying information. Consider then that one could copy the English language, and change parts of it, and release it as English 2.0. However, why would anyone use it? Even if it had marginal improvements over traditional English, where is the infrastructure? Where are the vast tomes of literature written in English 2.0? Where are the speakers and writers and scholars of this new language? Where are the libraries and Wikipedias full of English 2.0 articles? How many newspapers are written and conveyed in English 2.0? How many Peter Schiff podcasts are disseminated in this new alternative? That infrastructure wouldn’t exist, and neither therefore, would the users. This is merely the natural, spontaneous consequence of network effect, and it applies to English as a protocol for language just as it applies to Bitcoin as a protocol for money.

Now, does the network effect mean English, or Bitcoin, can never be replaced? No. But it does mean it’d be extremely difficult in either case.

But let’s remember something. Even if a superior crypto-currency overcomes Bitcoin in the open market (certainly possible), does that make Bitcoin a failure or Ponzi scheme? Does that negate the utility bestowed by Bitcoin while the market still favors it? Consider that one can benefit from the Bitcoin network with zero or very low exposure to the currency price long term. This means a payment made with Bitcoin last year still accomplished its objective – value moved freely, the users benefited, even if a year later the system falls apart and goes to zero. Thus, there is real utility today even if the system doesn’t work next year. The assumption that Bitcoin will be around for eternity is not a prerequisite for benefiting from its utility in the present.

Mutual Respect for Market-Based Money

I think you will discover, upon reflection, that your concerns about Bitcoin boil down to the thesis that Bitcoin is a volatile, highly speculative, and non-conservative asset class. In this, I wholeheartedly agree. But if your arguments are claiming that the payment network itself is some kind of fraud – a Ponzi scheme undeserved of respect or even consideration – then I must take issue with that. The Bitcoin network is an utterly revolutionary technology. It separates money from the state, in a way that gold, unfortunately, has been unable to do.

When fully understood, Bitcoin should bring tears to the eyes of anyone who fights against the tyranny and ignorance of coercive governments and their monetary witch doctors. This is why thousands of people around the world have dedicated their lives to this campaign. We are carrying out this experiment without anyone’s permission. We’ll either fail, or change the world in a way that was inconceivable before this technology existed.

I wholly support your idea to make a gold-backed digital currency. Please do it. I’d love to be your first customer, because I love gold. But being in this business, seeing how the payments and banking and regulatory world works, I can tell you that your initiative will likely fail, either by self-immolation (GoldMoney severing inter-account payments), or by governmental take down (e-gold).

A monetary/payment system that relies on gold backing is reliant on the backer. It relies on a centralized, trusted party, to warehouse the gold and provide convertibility. This is the counter-party risk eliminated by Bitcoin.

If there is a centralized backer for any payment system, then the system will have to follow all government laws, or be shut down. To follow the laws, personal customer information must be known, meaning privacy is impossible. Transfer limits and strict terms of use will be imposed, meaning financial freedom is impossible. And have fun with the compliance costs. Have you noticed international banks dropping American customers around the world? It is due to this unfortunate dynamic. And then, if the stars align, and the gold-backed currency manages to grow big and become a successful global payments network, it’s not unreasonable to assume that governments will take it down anyway, because it would compete with fiat – from which great swaths of their power originates.

You cannot compete with fiat by having a competitor that is vulnerable to the guns of government. Bitcoin may not be perfectly immune, but it is highly resistant. Censorship of e-gold was easy. Censorship of Bitcoin will be… entertaining.

Regardless, if you’re honestly interested in trying that experiment again, I will help you and support that effort, because I recognize the value of precious metals as commodities and as money. Until such a system actually exists, I am humbly asking you to support our efforts in kind, and am humbly suggesting to you that bitcoins, while non-physical, are indeed real and indeed have real value, because they are the one currency accepted on the most revolutionary payment network known to mankind. This is not theory – it’s actually working for millions of dollars of payments every day. We’ve moved beyond the Mises textbook. We’re running in the open market.

While Bitcoin is still a highly-volatile experiment, it deserves more respect than dismissal as a Ponzi scheme, and regardless of whether you think the current price of a bitcoin unit is justified, you must acknowledge that this technology, broadly speaking, has utility both for both economic exchange and, more importantly, individual freedom.

When my grandparents ask me how to protect their wealth, I don’t tell them to buy bitcoins. I tell them to buy precious metals. When they ask me how to transfer value across distance, I don’t tell them to ship gold. I tell them to use Bitcoin. My hope in writing this letter is simply this – that perhaps you’ll come to see Bitcoin and gold as beautiful compliments and important tools in the advancement of free-market money – one long-standing, conservative, and physical, the other new, technologically and politically disruptive, and digital. One will not replace the other, but I believe both will come to replace fiat, and good riddance to that stuff.

In Liberty, Erik Voorhees
Logged

<3 ENSUING
stato_1 said, "banoffee pie i reckon"
stato_1 said, "this is delicious"
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16570


View Profile
« Reply #746 on: January 16, 2018, 07:55:44 PM »

Largely the mainstream media is terrified of crypto. Mainstream media outlets are by and large owned by very rich old white men who are very happy with the status quo which has got them to where they are today. Mainstream media outlets would like to protect the way things are. They don't want a new technology to come in and disrupt and change things drastically. They produce sensationalist articles and play into people's existing confirmation biases. Also note how people who have made a lot of money out of crypto are also ridiculed in the mainstream press - as if that kind of person doesn't deserve to become successful and rich. Decentralised money and the separation of state and money are coming and ten years on from the financial sector being bailed out by world governments, they are now afraid of the speed and the growth of crpyto. Of course what they'd like more than anything is to get in on the action themselves and leverage a position where banks and big business make all the money and get all the benefits.

This is an excellent point.  I've been spending quite a lot of time learning about Crypto and it is does feel to me that there is some kind of agenda in the MSM.  The recent big Crypto stories have been that they are eating up huge amounts of energy and Mr Buffett's comments, mainly in the negative.  I think a lot of it is due to the journalists not really understanding what they are writing about, much like how when a big poker story goes mainstream.

It is a bubble; like the dot com one.  But after that burst no one stopped using the internet, and internet based companies are now valued at even more than their counterparts of the early 2000s.

Sadly I can't be really be an active investor right now, but this is still a technology that is in its infancy and I think it is a prudent measure for anyone to take the time to really try and understand what is going on.  Blockchain is not going away.

Naval is probably my favourite speaker on the technology as a whole and this is a really good and quick watch about the technology.

https://twitter.com/GoldmanSachs/status/951906924240531458

Hey Ryan hows it going?

Interesting comments you make about mainstream media, and I have to say as an active investor during the late 90s I disagree with the comments about rich white men happy with the current status quo. It is not in the media's interest to go against a fad, and that's exactly cryptocurrencies are.

If anything, the media are responsible both now and in the 90s for ramping up the price of each asset to unsustainable levels. When a Daily Mail reader hears about people making millions from buying and holding a basket of coins within a matter of months/a few years, naturally FOMO is going to kick in.

Personally, I take the MSM with a pinch of salt, as I also do the same with reddit. You will learn more on Bloomberg/CNBC about cryptos and get more balanced opinions from their guest analysts ( both for and against).

We work with a few publishers, and while I'd always agree with anyone who suggests that journalists don't usually know much about they're writing about, the idea that anyone is 'terrified' of crypto is pretty laughable.

The publishers we work with, and I'm guessing most of the media, are terrified about the World Wide Web and data protection laws - they're the only things that can damage them.

I noticed Kodak jumped on the bandwagon to say they're going to use blockchain technology to help protect artists rights. This is more the kind of future I'd envision for crypto - i.e. an existing company finding some way to use the technology to their benefit.

What isn't clear yet is whether blockchain technology is actually any better than existing technology - what Kodak is planning, can already be done. Their product has to actually be better than the alternatives for it to help keep blockchain technology relevant. If it is actually better then I wouldn't be surprised if Apple, Google, Amazon and the banks found a way to utilize it in some way - but I haven't seen any concrete example of how this is the case yet.

Great article here about this. It's like in the 90s when you added the name .com to your company and watched the share price rocket. Long Island Iced Tea company changes its name to Long Blockchain and the share price of a loss-making company shoots up 289%, really!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/a-fool-s-bet-maybe-but-sharks-fuel-crypto-mania-stock-rallies

The more I read about blockchain, the more similarities I see with the tech boom/bust.

Didn't you come on here recommending Online Blockchain, or whatever the advfn linked company was called?

I have a memory of some crappy little company from the dot.com days.  I can't remember the name of it, but it went through numerous different name changes to reflect whatever was hot right then.  So one week they planned to run a hedge fund, planned to be a technology broker, etc etc.  Each time they needed to raise money to take advantage of the bew opportunity.  The real purpose of the company seemed to be to keep raising finances to pay the generous director fees.  I used to post a lot on financial websites and they kept cropping up as a buy rec under different names.  When you clicked through and discovered it was the same company again, it was like an early version of been rick-rolled.

Wouln't surprise me at all if it turned out Online Blockchain was related in some way and they were right now planning to release some shiny new rickcoin. 

Never going to give you up, never going to let you down...
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
cambridgealex
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14876


#lovethegame


View Profile
« Reply #747 on: January 16, 2018, 08:16:13 PM »

What a well written piece, thank you for sharing, Dan. I'm forwarding it to my Dad who has just sent his first e-mail on the subject. "Warren Buffet says...."

I asked him in September what he thought of it, and he was less than positive shall we say! I thought it best not to mention that I'd just invested the day before...
« Last Edit: January 16, 2018, 08:21:56 PM by cambridgealex » Logged

Poker goals:
[ ] 7 figure score
[X] 8 figure score
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #748 on: January 16, 2018, 08:55:34 PM »

Aye, it's a great piece

"When fully understood, Bitcoin should bring tears to the eyes of anyone who fights against the tyranny and ignorance of coercive governments and their monetary witch doctors."

It's so good people can now fight tyranny and coercive Governments in their underpants by just splitting their screen - porn or poker on one side buy some btc on the other side. Always remember, the revolution starts at closing time.
Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
doubleup
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7049


View Profile
« Reply #749 on: January 16, 2018, 09:40:36 PM »



 As someone who has transferred $100,000 worth of value to another person instantly in another country (on a Sunday when banks were closed, no less), I am confident that you will not succeed in this demonstration.

Isn't this bollocks tho?  Isn't bitcoin crap at transmitting?  Doesn't it take too long and cost too much?  (Apart from the point that transmitting traditional money could also be exceptionally easy but for various regulatory issues).

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 ... 88 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.494 seconds with 21 queries.