All investing is gambling. You’re betting that the price of some asset if going to up in some future span of time. You tell yourself stories to rationalize the relative risk and reward. You hope that this story has some relationship to actual reality. You have probably glossed over some potential downsides because of greed or ideology. Maybe it will work out, maybe not.
A true investment has an intrinsic value based on the stream of cash it generates for its owner. That’s “investing”.
No crypto currency has any intrinsic value because none gave predictable future cash flows. Buying them is gambooling or “speculation” trying to predict short term price changes.
Note that u belief cryptocurrencies have utility as a medium of exchange, just not intrinsic value.
Wrong on your point RE FCF, you would be surprised - go and check out Aave it is a decentralized money market - running on USDC (amongst other assets), it generates cash by lending over collateralised loans which gives the depositors a large cut of the fees it takes. The point of an overcollateralised loan is synthetic leverage, or shorting.
Yes, that is one of the stories people tell themselves. Brokers can trade assets on the timescales of small fractions of seconds. It is even more fleeting than the casino. At least in Vegas you might get some free drinks.
Yes, there are various levels of risk both in the market and in a casino, and there are quick ways to lose everything in either if you set your mind to it.
But the main difference is that in an economy with a general upwards trend, everyone has a decent chance of leaving with more than they entered with.
In a casino, every single game has the odds stacked against you. It's a zero-sum game.
Yes, maybe I lose a few basis points to HFT at each buy and sale, and maybe somebody is getting rich off those pennies in aggregate. But that's largely irrelevant to me as a buy-and-hold investor.
And yes, it probably means that individuals "trading" on Robinhood lose on average. By definition, not everyone in the market can beat the market, and my empathy here is limited: Not everybody has to be a daytrader.
imo that’s oversimplified and drastically minimizes the difference between someone buying gamestop and someone buying a high dividend, high revenue stable company that’s been around 100 years. or he’ll even buying a bond
But when you look at the half the crypto from the top 50, most of them I don't think they will ever have any realistic level of real world adoption.
They all sell some pipe dreams of future DeFi this or future IOT smart contract, etc. Sounds pretty much like just cherrypicking some niche area of use case just for the sake of differentiation, yet somehow it's worth billions of dollars in market cap.
How about just focusing on delivering a p2p crypto payment that is actually cheap, fast and preferably eco-friendly like what Satoshi envisioned in the first place?
>How about just focusing on delivering a p2p crypto payment that is actually cheap, fast and preferably eco-friendly like what Satoshi envisioned in the first place?
https://www.chia.net seems to be a promising candidate to deliver that vision. I read their “green paper” and watched some interviews, and they seem to have jumped through the regulatory hoops already, in the hope to become a legitimate use case for institutions and governments. Also, it's founded by Bram Cohen, the inventor of the BitTorrent network.
I think comments like this dismiss all the people who are using bitcoin for actual, good reasons. They are mostly in developing nations which is why they seem to be getting ignored. There are people who otherwise have to pay very high cross-border transaction costs or can't get a bank account and have real utility for using bitcoin.
It would be like going to a drag race and claiming "cars are gambling". It ignores all the people using cars for commuting to work, getting groceries, etc. How about re-phrasing this to "cryptocurrency speculation is gambling"?
25 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 63.4 ms ] threadNo crypto currency has any intrinsic value because none gave predictable future cash flows. Buying them is gambooling or “speculation” trying to predict short term price changes.
Note that u belief cryptocurrencies have utility as a medium of exchange, just not intrinsic value.
I think your definition of a true investment is more of an opinion than actual fact.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/09/compare-inve....
But the main difference is that in an economy with a general upwards trend, everyone has a decent chance of leaving with more than they entered with.
In a casino, every single game has the odds stacked against you. It's a zero-sum game.
Yes, maybe I lose a few basis points to HFT at each buy and sale, and maybe somebody is getting rich off those pennies in aggregate. But that's largely irrelevant to me as a buy-and-hold investor.
And yes, it probably means that individuals "trading" on Robinhood lose on average. By definition, not everyone in the market can beat the market, and my empathy here is limited: Not everybody has to be a daytrader.
But when you look at the half the crypto from the top 50, most of them I don't think they will ever have any realistic level of real world adoption.
They all sell some pipe dreams of future DeFi this or future IOT smart contract, etc. Sounds pretty much like just cherrypicking some niche area of use case just for the sake of differentiation, yet somehow it's worth billions of dollars in market cap.
How about just focusing on delivering a p2p crypto payment that is actually cheap, fast and preferably eco-friendly like what Satoshi envisioned in the first place?
If only there was a company that financed such ventures.
Retail investors are usually not the best at due diligence, and the current situation (economical and psychological) certainly isn't helping.
https://www.chia.net seems to be a promising candidate to deliver that vision. I read their “green paper” and watched some interviews, and they seem to have jumped through the regulatory hoops already, in the hope to become a legitimate use case for institutions and governments. Also, it's founded by Bram Cohen, the inventor of the BitTorrent network.
Instant payment, scales well, doesn’t use a standard block system (uses a block lattice instead), doesn’t rely on mining so is extremely green.
It would be like going to a drag race and claiming "cars are gambling". It ignores all the people using cars for commuting to work, getting groceries, etc. How about re-phrasing this to "cryptocurrency speculation is gambling"?