Merged: Bitcoin - Part 3

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

- and mainly: the recipient of transaction is unknown, and the transaction cannot be refunded

This is by the far the most important. Because crypto scams tend not to rely on hacks, the blockchain has no way to differentiate between a "bad" transaction and a "good" one, and the end result is that if someone steals all your crypto, there's no way for you to ever get it back.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

This is by the far the most important. Because crypto scams tend not to rely on hacks, the blockchain has no way to differentiate between a "bad" transaction and a "good" one, and the end result is that if someone steals all your crypto, there's no way for you to ever get it back.

Apparently that's a feature, according to some.

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Wait what?

Who are the "unscrupulous scammers" here? The buyers? The sellers? The miners? The hodlers? Those actually using the crypto as a currency? The . . . .

The people who originally establish a particular cryptocurrency (i.e., the top of the pyramid) are the initial scammers.

After that, people who invent and deploy gimmicks (i.e., NFTs, "DAOs" soliciting investments in nebulous "roadmaps" that never come to fruition, the "metaverse", etc) to entice more new people to buy crypto and prop the bubble with real-cash inflow, are grifters.

And of course there's people who simply use the native mechanics of the blockchain, whether for laundering or by exploiting blockchain flaws or otherwise, to commit theft and other crimes, although they aren't causally linked the way the first two are, they're just opportunists.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

The people who originally establish a particular cryptocurrency (i.e., the top of the pyramid) are the initial scammers.

Why are they "scammers"? Is there something bad about starting a venture with the hopes of making a profit? (Or are they psychic and KNOW that their particular brand of crypto will be profitable?)

[Samson]

Meanwhile the people of El Salvador lose in every possible way with their psychotic president:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zachary...h=7fe73cf660ed

He buys crypto cheap at 40k when it could easily be 15k soon. Ordinary business is obligated to take payment in this hoax currency.

[Dr.Sid]

Isnt that still way better than their old currency ? And it cam be 150k just as well ..

[Samson]

Originally Posted by Dr.Sid

Isnt that still way better than their old currency ? And it cam be 150k just as well ..

But the people are protesting.
As I would if our pm started anchoring NZ's prospects to crypto.

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Why are they "scammers"? Is there something bad about starting a venture with the hopes of making a profit?

The guy on the corner selling counterfeit Gucci would certainly argue that there isn't.

Originally Posted by psionl0

(Or are they psychic and KNOW that their particular brand of crypto will be profitable?)

Whether a venture is successful or not has no bearing on whether a venture is a scam. Scams can fail. Like Fyre Festival.

Cryptocurrencies, and the sub-scams that are derivative from them, are scams because from top to bottom they require dishonesty in their presentation. This starts with how crypto - regardless of "which one", is marketed. Crypto, prospective buyers are told, is a functional alternative to national cash-currencies. It's money that the government and corporate interests can't dip their fingers in, free from regulators limiting your profit potential, private and nearly anonymous. The distributed and decentralized nature of the blockchain makes it hacker-proof and robust against bad actors trying to steal money.

In truth, all of these are lies, either positively or by omission. It actually has no inherent value whatsoever; the value of a whatever-coin lies strictly in how much "real" money you can trade it for when the time comes to cash out, so it isn't actually a functional alternative to cash currency at all, it's just another security. Nothing is stopping corporate interests from buying crypto and even influencing its value just like any asset based on cash money (e.g., Elon Musk), and the unregulated nature of crypto only means that such actors can freely do things they would go to prison for the rest of their lives for if they were doing it to cash dollars directly. Even the myth that crypto is out of the taxman's reach is at best a wilfully-blind fantasy, since the taxman has no problem simply waiting until you cash out - which you have to do eventually, otherwise your "crypto wallet" is nothing but an idle-game. And as far as security - well, anyone who has your Etherium wallet address can drop anything they want into it, including an app that will clean you out completely if you so much as look at it to see what it is - and there's literally nothing you can do about it if it happens.

The suckers who believe the lies and buy in will find out about all the warts eventually of course; but they're pressured and/or shamed into ignoring them....because that's just "fud", and you don't want to spread fud, do you? That would be a loser mentality - lol, have fun staying poor!

But yes; I feel quite comfortable generalizing cryptocurrency as a scam because it unabashedly uses all the same structure, language, and marketing of a superjuice MLM, to include using shame and peer-pressure to suppress reasonable skepticism and criticism among members.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

The guy on the corner selling counterfeit Gucci would certainly argue that there isn't.

That is a very poor analogy.

Crypto currencies are not marketed as any thing else but crypto currencies. Most are open source software with a totally transparent blockchain. It is easy enough to tell how much of the currency is concentrated in the hands of whales and what sort of activity is going on. Price movements are tracked by the minute on crypto websites.

If it comes to peddling lies, there is nowhere to hide.

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Cryptocurrencies, and the sub-scams that are derivative from them, are scams because . . . < snip >

I don't need to read further. You are obviously going to spin a simple case of making something and putting it to market as a massive conspiracy theory that has been debunked over and over ad nauseum.

Let me guess: did you throw in buzz words like "pyramid"? "ponzi"? "MLM"? "peer pressure"? "pump-n-dump"?

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by psionl0

That is a very poor analogy.

Crypto currencies are not marketed as any thing else but crypto currencies.

I guess you haven't seen the crypto ads with Matt Damon.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

The guy on the corner selling counterfeit Gucci would certainly argue that there isn't.



Whether a venture is successful or not has no bearing on whether a venture is a scam. Scams can fail. Like Fyre Festival.

Cryptocurrencies, and the sub-scams that are derivative from them, are scams because from top to bottom they require dishonesty in their presentation. This starts with how crypto - regardless of "which one", is marketed. Crypto, prospective buyers are told, is a functional alternative to national cash-currencies. It's money that the government and corporate interests can't dip their fingers in, free from regulators limiting your profit potential, private and nearly anonymous. The distributed and decentralized nature of the blockchain makes it hacker-proof and robust against bad actors trying to steal money.

In truth, all of these are lies, either positively or by omission. It actually has no inherent value whatsoever; the value of a whatever-coin lies strictly in how much "real" money you can trade it for when the time comes to cash out, so it isn't actually a functional alternative to cash currency at all, it's just another security. Nothing is stopping corporate interests from buying crypto and even influencing its value just like any asset based on cash money (e.g., Elon Musk), and the unregulated nature of crypto only means that such actors can freely do things they would go to prison for the rest of their lives for if they were doing it to cash dollars directly. Even the myth that crypto is out of the taxman's reach is at best a wilfully-blind fantasy, since the taxman has no problem simply waiting until you cash out - which you have to do eventually, otherwise your "crypto wallet" is nothing but an idle-game. And as far as security - well, anyone who has your Etherium wallet address can drop anything they want into it, including an app that will clean you out completely if you so much as look at it to see what it is - and there's literally nothing you can do about it if it happens.

The suckers who believe the lies and buy in will find out about all the warts eventually of course; but they're pressured and/or shamed into ignoring them....because that's just "fud", and you don't want to spread fud, do you? That would be a loser mentality - lol, have fun staying poor!

But yes; I feel quite comfortable generalizing cryptocurrency as a scam because it unabashedly uses all the same structure, language, and marketing of a superjuice MLM, to include using shame and peer-pressure to suppress reasonable skepticism and criticism among members.

You can choose to use crypto to buy goods and services directly, and that person can use it to buy goods and services. It doesn't need to be cashed out.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

I guess you haven't seen the crypto ads with Matt Damon.

No I haven't. Are these ads of the "invest in my highly profitable no risk crypto scheme" variety?

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Why are they "scammers"?

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Cryptocurrencies, and the sub-scams that are derivative from them, are scams because...

Originally Posted by psionl0

I don't need to read further. You are obviously going to spin a simple case of making something and putting it to market as a massive conspiracy theory that has been debunked over and over ad nauseum.

If you don't want to hear the answer, then don't ask the question. It's that simple.

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

You can choose to use crypto to buy goods and services directly, and that person can use it to buy goods and services. It doesn't need to be cashed out.

In theory, sure. In practice, it almost never works that way. When you buy a game from the Microsoft Store by redeeming Bitcoin, Microsoft isn't keeping that Bitcoin and using it later for corporate purchases; they're cashing it out.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

If you don't want to hear the answer, then don't ask the question. It's that simple.

It was always possible that you weren't going to repeat the same BS that has been recycled constantly for more than a decade. That turned out not to be true.

[gnome]

Encountered this one today--not new to find an article strongly opposing cryptocurrency, but the discussion of stablecoins and their questionable "reserves" is a new angle to me. Anything they're getting wrong here? Bolding in the quote is mine.

Jacobin: Cryptocurrency Is a Giant Ponzi Scheme

Originally Posted by Sohale Andrus Mortazavi

Without traditional banking relationships for issuing wire transfers, exchanges cannot easily facilitate trades between buyers and sellers on their platforms — someone has to pass cash between buyers and sellers. Stablecoins solve this problem by standing in for actual real dollars. They allow cryptocurrency markets to maintain ample liquidity — the ease with which assets can be converted into cash — without actually having to have cash on hand.

Tether has become integral to the functioning of global crypto markets. The majority of Bitcoin trades are now conducted in Tether, 70 percent by volume. By comparison, only 8 percent of trade volume is conducted in real dollars, with the remainder being other crypto-to-crypto pairs. Many industry skeptics, and even proponents, see this as a systemic risk and ticking time bomb. The whole system relies on traders actually being able to exchange tethers for real cash or — far more commonly in practice — other traditional cryptocurrencies that can be sold for cash on banked exchanges like Coinbase or Gemini, both headquartered in the United States.

Should faith in Tether falter, we could see its peg to the dollar collapse in a flash. This would be a doomsday scenario for crypto markets, with investors holding or trading crypto assets on unbanked exchanges unable to “cash” out, since there was never any cash there to begin with, only stablecoins. This would almost certainly cause a liquidity crisis on banked exchanges as well, as investors rush to cash out their crypto anywhere possible amid cratering prices, and banked exchanges processing far less volume would almost certainly not be able to pick up the slack.

There is no reason to have any faith in Tether. Tether’s peg to the dollar was initially predicated on the claim that the digital currency was fully backed by actual cash reserves — a dollar held in reserve for every tether issued — though this was later shown to be a lie. The company has since continuously revised down claims about how much cash they keep in reserve. Their latest public attestation on the matter, from March of last year, claimed to be holding only 3 percent of their reserves in cash. The rest was held in “cash equivalents,” mostly commercial paper — essentially IOUs from corporations that may or may not exist, given that reputable actors trading in commercial paper don’t appear to be doing any business with Tether.

While even these modest claims about their reserves may be a lie, as Tether has never undergone an external audit, none of this really matters, since Tether’s own terms of service make it clear that they do not guarantee the redemption of their digital tokens for cash. Should the market suddenly lose faith in Tether and exchanges become unable or unwilling to exchange them one for one with dollars or the respective amount of cryptocurrency, Tether accepts no obligation to use whatever reserves they may or may not have to buy back tethers.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by gnome

Encountered this one today--not new to find an article strongly opposing cryptocurrency, but the discussion of stablecoins and their questionable "reserves" is a new angle to me. Anything they're getting wrong here? Bolding in the quote is mine.

Jacobin: Cryptocurrency Is a Giant Ponzi Scheme

Criticism of Tether is valid. There is no way that Tether is fully backed by the USD so it could easily fail without notice.

Although a large number of bitcoin transactions are conducted in Tether, the effect on the bitcoin trade in the event of a Tether failure is not as clear cut as the article makes out. Any effect would almost certainly not be permanent.

The rest of the article is just the usual "bitcoin is a ponzi scheme and should be banned" BS that we see made by people all the time based purely on prejudice.

[gnome]

The effect of a Tether failure wouldn't have to be permanent to hit participants in the financial nards.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by gnome

The effect of a Tether failure wouldn't have to be permanent to hit participants in the financial nards.

I guess that hodlers would do what they always do when they hear "it's the end of bitcoin (this time for sure)" - wait.

[Samson]

Originally Posted by psionl0

I guess that hodlers would do what they always do when they hear "it's the end of bitcoin (this time for sure)" - wait.

Yep.
Michael Saylor is a classic. He declares he will sit through the bear market for Micro Strategy and never sell. Average price 26 plus k.
His personal holding looks better.
Once he has stated this how does he ever liquidate without eating humble pie?
It will be when Micro is down a few billion.

Eta more like 31k average
Here is the up to date story

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/21/micr...ccounting.html

[SuburbanTurkey]

In case it needed to be said:

Quote:

Don’t **** Anybody Who Wants to Get Your Consent Uploaded to the Blockchain
Consent needs to be fluid, and the blockchain is anything but.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/paqv...legalfling-app

Quote:

Using the LegalFling app, when two or more people want to have consensual sex, they both digitally “sign” a contract in the app. LegalFling then attaches a cryptographic hash of the interaction (a string of characters that represent the text) to a small amount of cryptocurrency that’s sent through the Waves network, a blockchain platform in the same family as Bitcoin and Ethereum. The hash is then permanently placed on the Waves blockchain for anyone to see.

A blockchain, whether it’s Bitcoin’s, or Ethereum’s, or Waves’, is basically a public ledger—it's a list of transactions that anyone can see, and it's secured with cryptography and expensive computing power. The ledger is shared between everybody running the blockchain's software, making it nigh-impossible to edit without anybody noticing.

The app was thoroughly panned last week for being a clumsy gimmick started by men, and for fundamentally misunderstanding the concept of sexual consent—which cannot be managed by a document. It needs to be a fluid process, open to revocation at any time, and legal contracts give off the exact opposite vibe. The app promises that consent can be revoked with a tap, but records on the blockchain are permanent.

Yeah, seems like a good litmus test, anyone who thinks this is a good idea is not someone to be trusted in your intimate life.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

In case it needed to be said:



https://www.vice.com/en/article/paqv...legalfling-app



Yeah, seems like a good litmus test, anyone who thinks this is a good idea is not someone to be trusted in your intimate life.

That's just silly. I can think of a number of occasions where an irrevocable contract might be handy but having sex is not one of them.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by psionl0

No I haven't. Are these ads of the "invest in my highly profitable no risk crypto scheme" variety?

You should really look it up

https://youtu.be/9hBC5TVdYT8

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

In theory, sure. In practice, it almost never works that way. When you buy a game from the Microsoft Store by redeeming Bitcoin, Microsoft isn't keeping that Bitcoin and using it later for corporate purchases; they're cashing it out.

The post I responded to said you have to exchange it for cash eventually.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

You should really look it up

https://youtu.be/9hBC5TVdYT8

Why didn't you just say "yes"? Do you realize that's 60 seconds of my life I will never get back again?

[jeremyp]

Originally Posted by psionl0

So what? Only people who think they can make great riches with minimal effort are susceptible to scams. More sensible people have nothing to fear from scammers.

Even if this were true, it doesn’t address my point

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by jeremyp

Even if this were true, it doesn’t address my point

Your "point" was that scammers are a bigger threat than the government. This is only true for the greedy or dishonest. As WC Fields pointed out, "You can't cheat an honest man".

OTOH the government is a threat to everybody. The Morrison government is in the throes of bringing in the most oppressive "anti trolling" legislation ever. It would criminalize criticism of the government.

[ponderingturtle]

In the goal of proper diversification how much of my portfolio should be in WOW gold?

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Why didn't you just say "yes"? Do you realize that's 60 seconds of my life I will never get back again?

🎶Once you hear the story of Damon crypto🎶 🎶You must share the story of Damon crypto 🎶 🎶Or you'll be consumed by Damon crypto🎶 🎶Which is like dying but it's worse!🎶

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Your "point" was that scammers are a bigger threat than the government. This is only true for the greedy or dishonest. As WC Fields pointed out, "You can't cheat an honest man".



OTOH the government is a threat to everybody. The Morrison government is in the throes of bringing in the most oppressive "anti trolling" legislation ever. It would criminalize criticism of the government.

Are you seriously saying only the greedy and dishonest get scammed?

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

In the goal of proper diversification how much of my portfolio should be in WOW gold?

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/com...for_5_bitcoin/

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Are you seriously saying only the greedy and dishonest get scammed?

Are you strawmanning me or do I really need to spell it out?

Anybody can be scammed even if they believe they are making an honest deal with a reputable firm. But if they are not enticed by promises of ill gotten gains then they are far less likely to be scammed.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by psionl0

Are you strawmanning me or do I really need to spell it out?

Anybody can be scammed even if they believe they are making an honest deal with a reputable firm. But if they are not enticed by promises of ill gotten gains then they are far less likely to be scammed.

Seems to me most of the people getting scammed in crypto are not seeking "ill gotten gains", but are being deceived by classic financial scams that are cloaked in techno-babble.

Speculators trying to get in early on the next big thing are ripe targets for scammers, and I wouldn't describe these dupes as seeking ill gotten gains.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Seems to me most of the people getting scammed in crypto are not seeking "ill gotten gains", but are being deceived by classic financial scams that are cloaked in techno-babble.

Speculators trying to get in early on the next big thing are ripe targets for scammers, and I wouldn't describe these dupes as seeking ill gotten gains.

Profits far in excess of what you would normally expect from an investment or "something for nothing" is close enough to what could be described as "ill gotten gains" that there is no point in splitting this hair.

[ponderingturtle]

If someone can only scam a scammer does that mean everyone who is taken in by multi level marketing is trying to scam people? A lot of them are people looking to start a business and trying to get on the capital side of capitalism.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

If someone can only scam a scammer does that mean everyone who is taken in by multi level marketing is trying to scam people? A lot of them are people looking to start a business and trying to get on the capital side of capitalism.

I don't know who is claiming the highlighted and it has nothing to do with the rest of your question.

Not all forms of MLMs are scams (the corner shop could be said to be part of an MLM) but if the only way to make a profit from a particular MLM is to recruit others to sell the same MLM then I would say that the participants are working a scam (whether they realize it or not).

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by psionl0

I don't know who is claiming the highlighted and it has nothing to do with the rest of your question.

Not all forms of MLMs are scams (the corner shop could be said to be part of an MLM) but if the only way to make a profit from a particular MLM is to recruit others to sell the same MLM then I would say that the participants are working a scam (whether they realize it or not).

Lol, sure. If you redefine words to mean things they don't, yeah I guess I can see it that way. Franchised 7-11 stores aren't MLMs.

The crypto-MLM comparison is pretty apt. The whole thing relies on perpetual growth and recruitment so early adopters can profit off the greater fool that come in later. They face the same problem, eventually you run out of greater fools.

[psionl0]

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

The crypto-MLM comparison is pretty apt stupid.

ftfy.

Nobody is being recruited to buy and sell cryptos and recruit others to do the same thing. It's just plain old check the current price and decide if you want to buy or sell at that price - just like any other product.

[SuburbanTurkey]

Originally Posted by psionl0

ftfy.

Nobody is being recruited to buy and sell cryptos and recruit others to do the same thing. It's just plain old check the current price and decide if you want to buy or sell at that price - just like any other product.

The whole NFT "bored apes" craze is exactly like that. They even use much of the same language about "communities" in an attempt to attract new members to drive up value.

An MLM promises a fraudulent version of a small business.

These NFT scams promise a fraudulent version of a capital investor.

[JoeMorgue]

In traditional investing when you invest in something it eventually has to do something or at least promise it will in the future. If I buy oil futures I'm buying the idea that in the future oil will exist that someone will pay for, and even that's borderline shady in my opinion. If I invest in a company I expect it will make money some day.

What's the "future" for crypto? What's is going to do tomorrow that it isn't doing today and what is it waiting on?

It's not a product, it's not service, and it's not going to be either one of those things in the future nor pretending it is going to be. If there's an economic definition of "nothing" better than that I'd love to hear it.

Even MLMs have to lie to you and tell you that you'll have a bunch of people working under you one day. This is like an MLM that starts AND stops at the first step and admits it.

At least with Beanie Babies we actually got the Beanie Babies.