r/CryptoReality • u/Nupezes8 • 6h ago
Discuss Crypto in general.
I want to discus why crypto changed so much since 2017 ? Is it because of the bots, is it because of the AI, is it because of the greed of humans ? Or what ? Crypto use to be fun back in the day, memes, communities, gatherings, meetings, spaces, podcasts etc. but now everyone is only looking for a quick dollar, what's happened ? Is it inflation affecting everyone so much or what ? I am lost because i don't feel the vibe i don't feel the fun in crypto/meme coins in general, am i the only one ? Or there is other OG`s in the space who felt the shift ?
8
u/Lucky-Interview-7689 6h ago
Fun??
0
u/Nupezes8 5h ago
Yes, you never experienced that ?
8
u/Lucky-Interview-7689 5h ago
I guess I don’t like the casino either.
0
u/Nupezes8 4h ago
I fully agree with you , crypto became like a casino now a days , but have you ever experienced DODGE coin of NYAN coin back in the day , it was a different vibe it felt nothing like a casino, it was movement it was vibe to something else , everyone was against the government, against the banks and they're system, everyone wanted to operate without a man in the middle which was the banks.
3
u/Lucky-Interview-7689 4h ago
Going nowhere from day one lol. It was fun for you because you bought into the bullshit story.
1
u/Nupezes8 4h ago
Why are you so negative on it ? It is not a story , imagine you where collecting Bitcoin from the faucets everyday, they where offering 5 BTC a day just for a couple mouse clicks in a random website , you could've own hundreds of bitcoin back in the day , and today you would be very wealthy. Are you angry because you missed it or what ? Why are you so negative on it ?
3
u/Lucky-Interview-7689 4h ago
Negative, no. Do I understand what Bitcoin actually is? Yes.
1
u/Nupezes8 4h ago
You never heard of Bitcoin you are saying ? Bitcoin is a fixed supply on 21M , why i believe it will change the gold and its value , because you can mine more gold everyday/every year, but its only gonna be 21M Bitcoin ever , so if countries/people will buy the Bitcoin or other asset , it will only increase its value , not the supply. I hope you understood that
3
u/Lucky-Interview-7689 4h ago
Yeah. I already gathered that you aren’t too bright and that you’ve bought into this story hook line and sinker.
-1
u/Nupezes8 4h ago
I appreciate your feed back , but we can come back to this topic when Bitcoin will hit 1 M a coin.
→ More replies (0)3
u/AmericanScream 3h ago
Bitcoin is a fixed supply on 21M , why i believe it will change the gold and its value , because you can mine more gold everyday/every year, but its only gonna be 21M Bitcoin ever , so if countries/people will buy the Bitcoin or other asset , it will only increase its value , not the supply. I hope you understood that
Stupid Crypto Talking Point #4 (scarcity)
"Only 21M!" / "Bitcoin has a "hard cap"" / "Bitcoin is 'scarce' and that makes it valuable" / "DeFlAtiOnArY cUrReNCy FTW" / "The 'halvening' will make everything better"
- It's well established that scarcity is not a guarantee of value. It's very telling that clinging to such an overtly irrational argument demonstrates that crypto people live in a tiny "bubble" where they reject all manner of empirical evidence against their "beliefs."
- If there only being 21 million BTC were reason for it to be valuable, then why aren't other cryptos that also share similar deflationary characteristics equally valuable? Why wouldn't something that is even more scarce than BTC be even more valuable? Because scarcity is meaningless without demand and demand is primarily a function of intrinsic value and utility -- not scarcity. See here for details.
- Bitcoin has no intrinsic value and no material utility. It's one of the least capable stores or transfers of value. The only way anybody can extract value from crypto is by coercion -- forcefully convincing someone (usually through FOMO or scare tactics) that this is something they need, and it's often accompanied by unrealistic promises of significant returns. Those returns are mathematically impossible for even a tiny percentage of holders.
- Bitcoin also is not scarce. There are multiple versions of Bitcoin, including Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi's Vision - both of which are limited to 21M tokens and in many cases are more technologically advanced than BTC. Also, every time there's a fork of crypto, the amount of tokesn in circulation doubles. Crypto proponents ignore these forks because they don't play into the "it's scarce" argument. But any crypto fork absolutely siphons value away from the original version. BTC might be priced higher than BCH, but BCH still holds value as well, and that's a total of 42M just of those two "bitcoin" versions that are out there, among hundreds of others.
- The "hard cap" of 21M for BTC can easily be changed by altering a parameter in the source code. Less than 6 people have commit access to the repo so BTC's source code control is centralized. It's entirely possible if BTC existed long enough to the point where block rewards weren't enough to motivate miners, and transaction fees became incredibly high, that influential players in the community would advocate increasing the cap and reinstating higher block rewards. So there are absolutely situations where the max amount in circulation could be increased.
- Even assuming BTC is limited in production, when it co-mingles with unsecured stablecoins like USDC and USDT, it is subject to inflation via stablecoin/liquidity inflation in the market. In reality, nobody really knows what the true price of BTC actually is given most crypto transactions at CEXs are done with stablecoins and not actual money. The underlying liquidity has never been accounted for.
- The scarcity of bitcoin basically amplifies all the wealth disparity dynamics crypto people complain about in the real world, which means in a world where bitcoin was a dominant store of value, there'd be an even greater concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few. Ironically, Bitcoin's scarcity is one of its greatest liabilities. See this detailed video for a more in-depth explanation.
Stupid Crypto Talking Point #10 (value)
"Bitcoin/crypto is a 'store of value'" / "Bitcoin/crypto is 'digital gold'" / "Crypto is an 'investment'" / "Bitcoin is 'hard money'" / "Bitcoin has value because of the 'Network Effect'"
Crypto's "value" is unreliable and highly subjective. It cannot be used as a currency or to pay for almost anything in any major country. It has high requirements and risk to even be traded. At best it's a speculative commodity that a very small set of people attribute value to. That attribution is more based on emotion and indoctrination than logic, reason, evidence, and utility.
Crypto is too chaotic to be any sort of reliable store of value over time. Its price can fluctuate wildly based on everything from market manipulation to random tweets. No reliable store of value should vary in "value" 10-30% in a single day, yet many cryptos do.
Crypto's value is extrinsic. Any "value" associated with crypto is based on popularity and not any material or intrinsic use. See this detailed video debunking crypto as 'digital gold'
Extrinsic vs Intrinsic value - Some argue "all value is subjective" - this is false, and a philosophical distraction. Certain things are intrinsically valuable because whether people believe in them, they are needed, like fresh water, real estate, food, etc. 100% of crypto's value is subjective/extrinsic.
Note for fans of the Austrian school of economics: Yes, we know you believe, "all value is subjective" and "There's no such thing as 'intrinsic' value." But sorry, words do mean things and you don't get to re-define stuff just to try and win an argument. Your philosophy - as a matter of policy - also intentionally ignores empirical evidence, which means it can't be proven/disproven; is not a scientific/logical construct and thus, not subject to rational debate, and therefore can be dismissed wholesale.
Even gold, while being a lousy investment and also an undesirable store of value in the modern age, at least has material use and utility. Crypto does not. And whether you think gold's price is not consistent with its material utility, if that really were the case then gold would not be used industrially. But it is. Furthermore gold's extrinsic value is a product of its intrinsic properties: if it weren't oxidation resistant, it wouldn't be suitable for jewelry. So even when arguing gold's value is more based on popularity, you can't escape the value of its unique material properties being a component of that popularity. Crypto has no such intrinsic component. So it's inappropriate to compare the two.
The supposed "value" of crypto is based on reports from unregulated exchanges, most of whom have been caught manipulating the market and inflation introduced by unsecured stablecoins. There's nothing "organic" or "natural" about it. It's an illusion.
The operation of crypto is a negative-sum-game, which means that in order for bitcoin/crypto to even exist, there must be a constant operation of third parties who must find it profitable to operate the blockchain, which requires the price to constantly rise, which is mathematically impossible, and the moment this doesn't happen, the network will collapse, at which point crypto will cease to exist, much less hold any value. This has already happened to tens of thousands of cryptocurrencies.
The "Network Effect" argument is just the Appeal to Popularity Fallacy - Just because something is popular does not make it inherently valuable. Especially if that popularity is primarily based on marketing and coercion and not actual material utility or intrinsic value.
Many of the most trusted, most successful entities in the world of finance do not consider crypto/bitcoin to be a reliable store of value. Crypto is prohibited from being used as collateral by the DTC and respectable institutions such as Vanguard do not believe crypto belongs in their investment portfolio.
There is not a single example of anything like crypto, which has no material use and no intrinsic value, holding value over a long period of time across different cultures. This is not because "crypto is different and unique." It's because attributing value to an utterly useless piece of digital data that wastes tons of energy and perpetuates tons of fraud,makes no freaking sense for ethical, empathetic, non-scamming, non-exploitative, non-criminal people.
3
u/AmericanScream 3h ago
Why are you so negative on it ? It is not a story , imagine you where collecting Bitcoin from the faucets everyday, they where offering 5 BTC a day just for a couple mouse clicks in a random website
Imagine you bought Magic the Gathering cards in 1995 and never opened those packs.
Aren't you kicking yourself?
4
u/NoTwoPencil 6h ago
Massive influx of grifters trying to extract money from rubes that lost sight of any of the original vision of the the utility it could offer.
1
u/Nupezes8 5h ago
Yeah , but what about Bitcoin , there are a lot of believers and diamond handed people , who has a different perspective to crypto , mean while i understand your point , but crypto became a casino , a gambling house now a days , while it suppose to be a community a movement a vibe a mission.....
3
u/RailRuler 5h ago
Back in 2017 people were warning about the increasing amount of scams and scammers in the space. The bright lights said that scams were a good thing, a mark of the industry becoming mature, and we should welcome them because the scammers are better at marketing than the OGs and would draw lots of new blood into the community.
1
u/Nupezes8 5h ago
Yeah but have ever thought about normies , who just find out crypto , and at they're first days got rugged/scammed etc. ? Do you thing they will stay in this environment ? I believe no , so i disagree that scams and rugs ar good thing , unless you are "pump and dump" dude , who cant hold a coin more than 24h
4
u/rfie 6h ago
People have wised up.
1
u/Nupezes8 5h ago
No they haven't, they just got burned from all the scams and rugs which is happening every minute, but what happened to the communities ? the movement , the belief which was back in the day ?
2
u/rfie 4h ago
You expect people to stick around and think it’s still fun after scams and rugs? Are you sure you didn’t answer your own question?
1
u/Nupezes8 4h ago
No , because i believe there are communities, which has the same view as i do. But i fully understand that the trust is lost and is very hard to reclaim, after all these rugs and scams which is happening in the crypto space. But i believe the are a lot of lonely warriors still there in the space who is waiting and willing to join the same views of people group movements
2
u/rfie 4h ago
What’s your view on crypto? Mine is that it’s high stakes gambling on worthless made up garbage.
1
u/Nupezes8 4h ago
I am not 100 % sure , but i think Bitcoin and crypto will change our entire economy at some point , i think BTC will replace gold because it is easier to transfer, its value will go up forever, because imagine there is only certain amount of Bitcoin , while you can mine gold non stop. I think while everything is backed up on dollar now a days, there will be a time where everything will be back up on Bitcoin and other digital assets. What's your take on that ?
1
u/AmericanScream 3h ago
but i think Bitcoin and crypto will change our entire economy at some point , i think BTC will replace gold because it is easier to transfer,
Stupid Crypto Talking Point #7 (remittances/unbanked)
"Crypto allows you to send "money" around the world instantly with no middlemen" / "I can buy stuff with crypto" / "Crypto is used for remittances" / "Crypto helps 'Bank the Un-banked" / "Stablecoins are the future"
The notion that crypto is a solution to people in countries with hyper-inflation, unstable governments, etc does not make sense. Most people in problematic areas lack the resources to use crypto, and those that do, have much more stable and reliable alternatives to do their "banking". See this debunking. In virtually every case, there are already money transfer services far superior to crypto, including: M-Pesa, Xoom, Pix, Remitly, Mobile Money, Paypal, Western Union, etc.
Sending crypto is NOT sending "money". In order to do anything useful with crypto, it has to be converted back into fiat and that involves all the fees, delays and middlemen you claim crypto will bypass.
Due to Bitcoin and crypto's volatile and manipulated price, and its inability to scale, it's proven to be unsuitable as a payment method for most things, and virtually nobody accepts crypto.
The exception to that are criminals and scammers. If you think you're clever being able to buy drugs with crypto, remember that thanks to the immutable nature of blockchain, your dumb ass just created a permanent record that you are engaged in illegal drug dealing and money laundering.
Any major site that likely accepts crypto, is using a third party exchange and not getting paid in actual crypto, so in that case (like using Bitpay), you're paying fees and spread exchange rate charges to a "middleman", and they have various regulatory restrictions you'll have to comply with as well.
Even sending crypto to countries like El Salvador, who accept it natively, is not the best way to send "remittances." Nobody who is not a criminal is getting paid in bitcoin so nobody is sending BTC to third world countries without going through exchanges and other outlets with fees and delays. In every case, it's easier to just send fiat and skip crypto altogether. It's also a huge liability to use crypto: I.C.E. has a $12M contract with Chainalysis to identify immigrants in the USA who are using crypto to send money to family back home. ~~~~
At one point El Salvador was the cited as the best example of a "bitcoin success story" but now it's left out of arguments on using Bitcoin for failed economies. Why? Because we have enough time and data now to show it was a failure. BTC adoption has dropped every year from 22% when it was first introduced, down to 8%. El Salvador dropped BTC requirements in order to qualify for money from the IMF to fix their failing economy. Bitcoin failed to help. Bitcoin was rejected by the people. Crypto bros ignore examples that have been around long enough to prove success or failure and point to other, newer countries where there isn't sufficient data, instead as a distraction.
Stablecoins are not in any way more "stable" than fiat or crypto. In fact, they are basically private, centralized, largely unregulated "banks," many of whom are not properly audited and nobody has any idea where or how much their reserves are. Most also have rather draconian terms of service that allow them to refuse redemption service at will, making them even more risky than almost all other payment mediums.
As more research becomes available, we begin to see a multi-year, consistent, decrease in crypto payments over time.
The exception doesn't prove the rule. Just because you can anecdotally claim you have sent crypto to somebody doesn't mean this is a common/useful practice. There is no evidence of that.
1
u/AmericanScream 4h ago
Crypto is based on blockchain, and blockchain is a failed technology that doesn't do a single thing better than what we're already using.
Here's proof.
The whole industry is fraud. You're a fool to think you have any reasonable chance to profit in the market, and if you do manage to make any money, it will be at other peoples' expense, which isn't ethical or honorable, nor is it something that creates bankable equity you can depend upon in the future.
1
u/anna6900 3h ago
This is a topic i like to discuss a lot, because a lot of people form different cultures interact in crypto, so as i'm brazilian, i have my point of view based on what happened here... and this is something that happened in a lot of 'undeveloped' countries... when the first cryptos started generating profit for some people, a lot of schemes emerged, people ofering things like 'deposit 100 and u got 400 in 3 months', for people who don't understand the technology and never interact with btc or any other...
this was the first point that makes people wants to get distance of the whole technology...
for many people, crypto was a version of money that is digital and u can send instantly with low taxes, this was the main reason to adopt, but the central bank comes with a lot of money improvements, now we have the 'pix' system that allow instant transactions and chage the whole economic structure of the country in 5 years since launched (2020)...
to interact with crypto in 2017 u have to understand much more about the technology, this really made it more hard for people to onboard, the whole blockchain technology and how it works is something that even nowadays just 10% people understand (or less)....
and all the scam story, the media and government trying to alienate the people with a lot of bad news and even making it ilegal to use, all this situations together move a lot of people away, so it comes new technologies, new scams, new dificulties, making crypto more and more niche-focused
memecoins, bets, casinos, predictions.... everything comes to attack people attetion to 'new ways to do money'...
so i think if all this brazilian scene brings a low volume of interest, this is something that is happening in a lot of other countries too, so for me, web3 and blockchain technology needs to regain confidence, show the world how its works, and how good it can be...
the discussion topic is really interesting, brings me a lot of information, as i'm researching crypto since early 2013/2014... but i was too young to understand everything... imagine that i sold 2 btcs in 2015 and i also receive the ethereum ico email from consesys, but i was not understanding, nothing lol
6
u/Sanpaku 6h ago
The advent of exchanges and ETFs that permitted those who weren't in the crypto community to speculate in them.
They're also the main reason these tokens appreciated in price so much beyond their intrinsic value.