Slashdot Mirror


As Value of Cryptocurrencies Falls, a Lot of New and Risk-Taking Investors Are Suffering Immensely (nytimes.com)

After the latest round of big price drops, many cryptocurrencies have given back all of the enormous gains they experienced last winter. The value of all outstanding digital tokens has fallen by about $600 billion, or 75 percent, since the peak in January, according to data from the website coinmarketcap.com. The New York Times: The virtual currency markets have been through booms and busts before -- and recovered to boom again. But this bust could have a more lasting impact on the technology's adoption because of the sheer number of ordinary people who invested in digital tokens over the last year, and who are likely to associate cryptocurrencies with financial ruin for a very long time. [...] By many metrics, more people put money into virtual currencies last fall and winter than in all of the preceding nine or so years. Coinbase, the largest cryptocurrency brokerage in the United States, doubled its number of customers between October and March. The start-up Square began allowing the users of its mobile app, Square Cash, to buy Bitcoin last November.

[...] Kim Hyon-jeong, a 45-year-old teacher and mother of one who lives on the outskirts of Seoul, said she put about 100 million won, or $90,000, into cryptocurrencies last fall. She drew on savings, an insurance policy and a $25,000 loan. Her investments are now down about 90 percent. "I thought that cryptocurrencies would be the one and only breakthrough for ordinary hardworking people like us," she said. "I thought my family and I could escape hardship and live more comfortably, but it turned out to be the other way around."

[...] In the United States, Charles Herman, a 29-year-old small-business owner in Charleston, S.C., became obsessed with virtual currencies in September. He said he now felt that he had wasted 10 months of his life trying to play the markets. While he is essentially back to the $4,000 he put in, he has soured on the revolutionary promises that virtual currency fanatics made for the technology last year and has resumed investing his money in real estate. "I guess I thought we were 'sticking it to the man' when I got on board," Mr. Herman said. "But I think 'the man' had already caught on, and had an exit strategy."

559 comments

  1. It's just a get rich quick scheme by magzteel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Those two anecdotes are stories of people hoping to magically get rich quick. The outcome is unsurprising.

    1. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by bkmoore · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the words of Warren Buffett, it's called "the greater fool business model" and it's the belief that a greater fool will come along and pay you more than you paid.

    2. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Thundercat007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It really was, especially with articles that were headlined "we have no idea why it's going up" and "people are mortgaging their homes to get into the act" and "75% of coins are held by like 5 people". Once those articles hit the street, the ponzie scheme was complete. They sold, dumped their coins and walked away probably billionaires

    3. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2

      In fewer words:

      Duh.

    4. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I want to know where the hundreds of people who used to post here about how Bitcoin had no limits, that every last Bitcoin would soon be worth a million bucks went to. They've been embarrassingly silent lately.

      Come back! We want to say "told you so!".

      Seriously, where are they now?

      --
      No sig today...
    5. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They didn't walk away, exactly. They're still out there, mining, and manipulating the prices to suck in the remaining fools.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Reddit support groups telling each other to HODL until the values goes back up enough to afford that lambo.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeahh suckers! HODL your coins so I can sell them instead and cash in my money :)

    8. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's basically the business model of internet startups. Build something, then hope that one of the big players actually thinks it has value and buys it before funding runs out because you have exactly zero idea how to monetize it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When bitcoin was $1800 you mean? That was me.

    10. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the anecdotes are also an accurate representation of the main reason for the insane rise in value of cryptocurrencies. How else would you explain it than more and more people making speculative "investments".

    11. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by jythie · · Score: 1

      I am sure they will reappear next time the price goes up a little to tell us all how as 16 year olds they were buying ferraris and dating supermodels.

    12. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be educational to tract down the flow of marketing messages that targeted these kinds of people. Somebody must have violated the laws or regulations related to investments in at least one country.

    13. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reddit support groups telling each other to HODL until the values goes back up enough to afford that lambo.

      Or telling other people to "buy the dip"

    14. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1, Troll

      There is also quite a lot of theft going on. I'm afraid that some if not all of the major exchanges have engaged in wholesale theft from their clients, notably Silk Road, and Mt. Gox. The deliberate lack of traceability of hte funds have encouraged criminal activity of many sorts, but particularly theft by exchanges and trade in "the dark web", where ordinary subpoenas are very difficult to apply.

    15. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Funny

      They are still here, now posting about Tesla stock.

    16. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by jdavidb · · Score: 1

      I keep quietly buying more Bitcoin Cash every payday. Unfortunately I had to spend some lately for car repairs, and now wasn't a good time to do that, but you do what you have to do.

    17. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      A good question, but I don't think the current state of cryptocurrencies is to blame for their silence. This site is bleeding users to death. They mostly all left here and went somewhere else

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    18. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The tulip bulbs have found to be rotten.

    19. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by houghi · · Score: 1

      The general idea I got that the majority of postings here said that it would break, only that nobody knew when.
      So I would like to see who these hundreds of users are that claimed it and I see AC as one user.
      That said, saying it will go up is a standard thing to say when you want to sell.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    20. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure wish I could find (if there is one) a way to scour someone's posts. Pretty sure I recall you supporting BitCoin a while back.

    21. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those were just investors trying to pump up the value by tricking /. suckers.

    22. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Sure wish I could find (if there is one) a way to scour someone's posts

      Please learn to internet.

      Pretty sure I recall you supporting BitCoin a while back.

      All I found was criticism, and some technical analysis. But I got bored after looking through about ten conversations.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

      In the words of Warren Buffett, it's called "the greater fool business model" and it's the belief that a greater fool will come along and pay you more than you paid.

      It worked for some of them. For every man that lost $1000 in this scheme, another man gained $1000. Of course, overall there is a net loss because it takes energy to create the coins in the first place. ... and it's probably going to happen all over again- I hear Bitcoin is up sharply again now... another cycle of redistribution of wealth from one investor to another may be about to begin.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    24. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by huwiler · · Score: 1

      In the words of Warren Buffett, it's called "the greater fool business model" and it's the belief that a greater fool will come along and pay you more than you paid.

      That doesn't exactly apply here. It's not about whether or not some fool will come along and buy something you purchased for more money than you paid - it's about believing the value will rise naturally due to speculation + adoption + technical advancements (in cases like IOT data monetization). It's a high risk + high reward investment, and you need to go into it understanding that you could very easily loose your entire investment. If you are young, it probably makes sense to put a small percentage of your portfolio into crypto, but don't be stupid about it. 5% of my portfolio is currently in crypto, and as a strong believer in DLT + potential to disrupt many industries, I'm using this bear market to increase that percentage through dollar cost averaging (buying small amounts each month).

    25. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I want to know where the hundreds of people who used to post here about how Bitcoin had no limits, that every last Bitcoin would soon be worth a million bucks went to. They've been embarrassingly silent lately.

      Come back! We want to say "told you so!".

      Seriously, where are they now?

      To be honest- I still wish I had bought a bunch of bitcoin when they were $1 or $2 each. I remember laughing at them then... I still would be a wealthy man if I had bought then and sold now. /assuming they weren't stolen from me, or I lost the key... or... any of the many other dangers of losing bitcoins.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    26. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Of course the outcome is unsurprising... seriously it is the normal mathematical trend for Bitcoin over time. This is how you weed out the idiots who are trying to make a quick buck betting on crypto-currencies and the technically illiterate business math types who frankly are taking entirely too long to put in their appropriate merit-based place managing fast food chains rather than holding executive positions in important societal structures like corporations.

      There is only one cryptocurrency. Bitcoin, Bitcoin cash is actually just the latest revision of that original cryptocurrency. It's importance and value according to speculators comparing it with fiat currencies at the moment isn't really particularly important.

    27. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      The general idea I got that the majority of postings here said that it would break, only that nobody knew when.
      So I would like to see who these hundreds of users are that claimed it and I see AC as one user.
      That said, saying it will go up is a standard thing to say when you want to sell.

      Yeah, it was all pretty predictable. And because there is a use for them on the blackmarket I think a lot of us saw that when the bubble did pop- it wouldn't lose all value- it would retain some baseline value.

      Everything went how I expected it- except one. I thought that when the banks got involved it would stabalise the currency and make the ups and downs less extreme. If anything, the banks getting involved have made it more volatile. So I definitely got that prediction wrong.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    28. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because they weren't hundreds of people. They were paid to do it, and each person probably had dozens of accounts. Not that there weren't some genuine fools, but most were not.

    29. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1, Funny

      It is not and was never a Ponzi scheme. Cryptocurrency is a gift to the people and doesn't disappear just because a few investors do. I suppose facebook, google, and microsoft were ponzi schemes as well? I mean their early adopters got insanely rich after all. Speculation can pump, dump, and cycle all day long but the cryptocurrency (bitcoin is the only real one, bitcoin cash is the current version though) isn't going anywhere. This is no different than the popularity cycles of the open software ecosystem vs closed software ecosystem. Cryptocurrency will beat fiat currency in the end, it is inevitable.

      75% of the coins are not and were never held by 5 people, that is nonsense.

    30. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      OTOH, I've seen suicide hotline numbers posted there.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    31. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Yes, and you pop your head up every down cycle and during every up cycle you proclaim Ponzi!!! It's been going on for 10+ years now. Nobody gives a damn about the speculative market and its booms and crashes.

    32. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the comment of the day, hands down....

    33. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1

      The value will go up over time just like the S&P 500 has gone up an average 15% or so over time... but depending on when you bought in the S&P 500 could actually be WAY down.

      The speculative market will go up, it will bubble, it will pop. Bubble and pop with steady gain over time has been the constant cycle of Bitcoin. I say it when it's down, I say it when it's up, I say it because the speculative market doesn't define the value of Bitcoin (or the current iteration, bitcoin cash).

    34. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 2

      Which has nothing to do with the merit or value of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency and everything to do with investors and suckers.

      Those who opposed bitcoin from the start ignored this and instead declared that early investors making money automatically translated into a Ponzi scheme. They are good with Zuckerberg making insane money for his early Facebook investment but somehow it isn't okay for the bitcoin guys to do it because venture capital firms didn't get a piece?

    35. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought in when it was $85 and i couldn't be happier with the current price. Hopefully it goes up again, but either way i'm good.

    36. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by EvilSS · · Score: 2

      And if the first one invested in the fall of 2017, then it would have worked had she sold at the peak in January. But she bought into the hype and instead of being rational about it she held on and now it's gone.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    37. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, Barbie is the superest of supermodels. And she has a sports car.

    38. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original concept had promise, but as soon as it got big the details of it's impracticality became apparent for anything but use as a stock - and even then it's particularly fragile stock backed by nothing other than hype. At it's peak last year it was at peak hype and minimum utility, no one could practically buy anything with it at such a ridiculous transaction processing fee which was apparent by all online retailers disowning it... everyone investing in it at that point was operating on hype, people making money were gamblers or high risk short sellers that were just transferring their understanding of stock markets, everyone else were complete fools with delusions of grandeur using it as a long term investment operating on the hype directly as their understanding of it value.

    39. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Cryptocurrency is a gift to the people

      Thank you; I needed that. :)

    40. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Jaime2 · · Score: 1

      Cryptocurrency is just a technical mechanism to create a token that can only be "owned" by a single wallet. The underlying mechanism isn't revolutionary and has no inherent value. The value comes from whatever backs the currency - in the end it won't beat fiat currency, it will simple be the new fiat currency. You'll see its adoption increase when we get rid of this ridiculous idea of "mining" and a currency is introduced by a stable authority by simply filling an originating wallet while simultaneously destroying a quantity of some other fiat currency.

      BTW, blockchain is just an improved version of hash chaining, which has been around for about forty years. I've been hash chaining log records since the 90's whenever someone asks to me provide a tamper-proofing mechanism that would be a tremendous amount of work to circumvent.

    41. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      How is a speculator coming in and buying your cryptocurrency because they think the value of those electrons will rise further not part of the "greater fool" thinking? Dollar cost averaging only works if the value goes up again at some future point, otherwise it's just widening your losing position. Go ahead and ask investors in Lehman Brothers how dollar cost averaging worked out for them in 2008 - LEH is down by over 30% in one day? Sweet, I can double down on my investment and double my profits when it goes back up!

      LEH: $0.00...

      Part of the "greater fool" model is that the greatest fool doesn't realize they are the greatest fool, and ends up eating the losers that all the lesser fools unloaded onto them.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    42. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Blockchain isn't an improved version of a hash chain at all. It IS a hash chain. If you want to be generous, it adds some conventions so that a bunch of people can all agree on who gets to write the next node on the chain.

      If you set up a public git account and came up with a system to assign a one time use password to a random registered accounts that they could use to make the next commit, you'd have a blockchain.

    43. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      There's a lot of criticism about social media company bubbles.

      The idea of a blockchain-based monetary exchange system probably has some value. Problem is, the speculation has probably killed that. Mindy Mom isn't going to buy any bitcoin to send to her kid at college because she's read about how much of a shit show it is. Perhaps some stable government will introduce a blockchain currency, peg it's value, and call it something else that people will trust.

    44. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just saw the news this week, the word "rekt" now gets more searches than the word "hodl"

    45. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think that the end game isn't to just inflate power consumption? When you think about it, the people that are making the most money would be the power companies, we have created a fake need for so much more power.

    46. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      tl/dr: Cash is not an investment.

      People have a funny idea of what a good currency is. Currency is not an investment vehicle - it's an aid to barter and exchange. An ideal currency is stable. Full stop. To achieve stability, the currency must have a supply which can grow in concert with the economy. And while sudden or large magnitude drops in value can cause a panic, in general an appreciating currency is much more harmful than a depreciating currency. This is because an appreciating currency encourages people to invest in the currency itself, making it unavailable for commerce and causing people to delay purchases or other investments in favor of holding the cash as long as possible. Obviously you don't want you aid to barter and exchange making barter and exchange more difficult or expensive!

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    47. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2

      I am sure they will reappear next time the price goes up a little to tell us all how as 16 year olds they were buying ferraris and dating supermodels.

      That was before they invested in bitcoin. Now they're sacking at Walmart.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    48. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      To be honest- I still wish I had bought a bunch of bitcoin when they were $1 or $2 each.

      Hindsight is always 20:20

      --
      No sig today...
    49. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google and Microsoft actually create things of value, and sell them to actual customers.

      You sound like a zealot. How much money have you lost on crypto speculation now?

    50. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of us are still up 1000% or more from pre-2017 investments in Bitcoin. We long-term investors have lived through these Bitcoin bubbles before, and we can't help but notice that we keep seeing higher highs and higher lows.

    51. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Cryptocurrency is a pump and dump scheme and most of us said this six months before the Gentle Investor even heard of it.

      It may not be 5 people but the point is still there:

      Just 4% Own Over 95% Of Bitcoin

      Comparing crypto to Facebook, Google, and Microsoft is disingenuous because it's equating a vacuous, speculative, "Beanie Baby," artificial valuation to companies that actually offer products and services.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    52. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by sjwest · · Score: 1

      I had one of those types call me an idiot here for not having a gpu card that cost thousands of dollars according to nvid logic. I think based on what they said they spent there btc on meant they where a teenager as a sony playstation was the result.

      Still do not own an gpu.

    53. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, not sure how winning a investment lottery is "working hard".

      The #1 rule of investing was broken. Never invest money you cannot afford to live without.

    54. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      overall there is a net loss because it takes energy to create the coins in the first place.

      That just means the winner is the power company.

    55. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 1

      The value will go up over time just like the S&P 500 has gone up an average 15% or so over time... but depending on when you bought in the S&P 500 could actually be WAY down.

      The speculative market will go up, it will bubble, it will pop. Bubble and pop with steady gain over time has been the constant cycle of Bitcoin. I say it when it's down, I say it when it's up, I say it because the speculative market doesn't define the value of Bitcoin (or the current iteration, bitcoin cash).

      if you went all in on the S&P and bought at the worst time possible (intraday ath 2,873.23) you'd be down about 0,35% looking at the screen right now.

    56. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Good question.

      Not by way of flamebait, but by way of comparison, places I go to eat and to work out habitually had Fox News on the TV (in addition to sports in other parts of the establishments).

      Nowadays, it's CNN (I don't like either network).

      Also, my Facebook Timeline used to be filled with pro-Trump stuff. That has fallen off greatly.

      Even my Twitter feed sees less and less of that, and the white supremacy and anti-gun control posts.

      Your observation that excitement over crypto is waning and may be an indicator of thibgs to come is showing up in the political arena, as well.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    57. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by msauve · · Score: 2

      "Hindsight is always 20:20"

      Technically, I think it's 20:-20,

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    58. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1

      "The idea of a blockchain-based monetary exchange system probably has some value. Problem is, the speculation has probably killed that. Mindy Mom isn't going to buy any bitcoin to send to her kid at college because she's read about how much of a shit show it is. Perhaps some stable government will introduce a blockchain currency, peg it's value, and call it something else that people will trust."

      Bitcoin (or the current version, bitcoin cash) is pretty solidly entrenched in a number of countries where the governments are not so stable and in black markets created by overreaching governments. It will take cryptocurrency time to make headway where things are stable but it will. The US is riper for this than most believe. Official inflation is low while actual inflation, particularly where it matters today in commodity electronics, is off the charts. The price of a middle class smartphone has tripled within less than a decade. Misinformation campaigns spreading fake news about tech labor shortages alongside record level technology layoffs are at an all time high.

    59. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by tttonyyy · · Score: 1

      I want to know where the hundreds of people who used to post here about how Bitcoin had no limits, that every last Bitcoin would soon be worth a million bucks went to. They've been embarrassingly silent lately.

      Come back! We want to say "told you so!".

      Seriously, where are they now?

      Maybe the smart ones were selling at the time (after bigging up how valuable they would be) and are now too far off shore in their yachts to read slashdot

      Or in their basements, crying into their tea (the second brew using that tea bag), unable to afford internet any more. One of the two.

      --
      biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
    60. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by es330td · · Score: 1

      Hindsight is always 20:20

      Not really. There are plenty of people who when seeing what they did wrong in the past do it again. Any time somebody tells you "But this time it is different..." they probably need to get their hindsight vision checked.

    61. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I predicted along the same lines as you did with this exception:

      I thought that when the banks got involved it would stabalise the currency ...

      My position at the outset was that when crypto found its way to fiat, the end would be near.

      My reasoning was that crypto would convert to real currency and, when that happened, regulators would treat crypto as proxy for real money.

      That has happened.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    62. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we post Ads for Darwin awards?

    63. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Unsurprising and predictable. It is useful to separate people into those with at least a minimal clue and those without though.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    64. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, pyramid schemes are all effectively the same. Put money in, collect from the morons who buy from you.

    65. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      I doubt they're still mining. They got all their coins a decade ago, when mining (a) paid better per block and (b) was significantly cheaper. Why bother mining when you still have all those unsold coins?

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    66. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think either of those are actual words

    67. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by janimal · · Score: 1

      Blockchain is a hash chain with a balance ledger and an incentive scheme to make it very expensive to tamper with.
      In the same way, investment gold is nothing but an element that is easy to divide and move around, but very inert and hard to tamper with. People like to hoard these tokens, because theyâ(TM)re durable.
      The value of gold isnâ(TM)t due to the fact that you can build electronics and gold teeth with. Itâ(TM)s expensive, because people like to hoard it and itâ(TM)s durable.

    68. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by vakuona · · Score: 1

      Or basically, in casino speak, "The House" wins again.

    69. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by mysidia · · Score: 1

      This should strengthen Bitcoin's foundation As a payment system and a potential currency in the long run, as it is not intended as a Get Rich quick scheme -- if you want to get rich off Bitcoin the main way is to start a more traditional business providing goods or services that are demand and utilize Bitcoin technology to do it if you like, but most such businesses should keep most operational assets in traditional currencies for now.

    70. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not and was never a Ponzi scheme. Cryptocurrency is a gift to the people

      lol funniest drivel I've read in some time

    71. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh my lawd so much this

    72. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by lactose99 · · Score: 1

      Insanity -- doing the same thing repeatedly expecting a different outcome.

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    73. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But just as with gambling at a casino, enough people do win to keep people coming back for more.

    74. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My position at the outset was that when crypto found its way to fiat, the end would be near. My reasoning was that crypto would convert to real currency and, when that happened, regulators would treat crypto as proxy for real money. That has happened.

      I'm not sure what you are saying. Cryptocurrency was always an asset and capital gains from assets are taxed. My house isn't a proxy for real money. Nor are stocks.

    75. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " places I go to eat and to work out"

      Uh, behind the dumpster, and behind the dumpster? When are you publishing Unemployable, you twelve-faced triple-chinned fat fraud?

    76. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good thing you have that stack of worthless silver coins next to your ball of dried socks under your futon, huh Chris?

    77. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by James+Carnley · · Score: 1

      Your logic: The iPhone was just an improved version of a phone. Phones have existed forever. Therefore phones are just an old technology and haven't made anything better.

    78. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by gander666 · · Score: 1

      Shit, and my mod points expired this morning...

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
    79. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by huwiler · · Score: 1

      LEH isn't a great example because investing in crypto is different than investing in an equity. With a traditional equity, if a company goes under, you lose your money. With DLT, if the organization that governs its development goes under, the DLT remains and is available to be picked up by others. You will never lose your tokens. If you find a DLT with a huge community backing, partnerships with governments and tech companies, and technology that in some way makes it superior to others for a given market, then why not invest? By and large the folks who voice the loudest criticism of cryptocurrencies typically have very little or no grasp on exactly what they are and why DLT is such a ground breaking and disruptive technology. Why is removing banks from digital transfer of value important? How big is the IOT market projected to be in a few years? Is it possible to monetize IOT using traditional methods of payment? Imagine being able to send funds to anyone instantly with zero fee and no middleman in a secure auditable way. Imagine a payment network that can grow without limit and with each additional transaction gets faster. One of my favorite presentations that gives a fantastic high level vision of one of my favorite DLT projects (IOTA) was given by Terry Shane and can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?.... As a developer, I find it amazing to be able to use a simple IOTA library to accept payments in iota -- programmatically adding them to the DLT -- and then receiving an event that can be reacted to once payment (or data with no money... you can send anything) is confirmed... all without banking apis, payment processors, etc. I'm personally still in the green with regard to my own crypto investments. No money has been lost, and I am comfortable with the possibility of losing my investment.

    80. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      When your accountant starts asking you about Bitcoin, you know it's time to get out.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    81. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by dnaumov · · Score: 1

      Cash is an option on everything with no expiration date

    82. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a retard and a troll.
      OF COURSE
      1) mining happens, it's decentralized cryptocurrency, duh.
      2) free and open markets have prices and buyers and sellers, expect that. Just like anything else DYOR if you want to know what a good price and moment is.

    83. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slowly building infrastructure and rolling out platforms behind the scenes, and buying coins that will eventually meet the future demands.

    84. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

      Sounds like windows networking to me. Apply the same settings three times, get three different results. Maybe this time you'll be able to ping reliably. Was it those settings you put in, or random voodo?

    85. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      How can one 'not afford internet'? These days you take your laptop to the library or your tablet to McDonalds or a coffee shop and the Internet is free.

    86. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Are you sure about that?

      This [question of asset or not] is not related to the question of whether or how much you should invest. You can call cryptocurrencies an asset class and assign zero or even negative portfolio weight to them. Or you can decide they're not an asset class and still try to get positive or negative exposure to them via other asset classes.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    87. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      That describes gold. Cash has too many reasons to go down in value and hardly any to go up.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    88. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then theyâ(TM)re promoted to management.

    89. Re: It's just a get rich quick scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1

      Don't forget it can be authenticated and exchanged globally in minutes. Resistant to tamper, durable, hoardable, counterfeit proof, near instant global transactions, not subject to the will of a third party, not needed for other practical uses that would interfere with valuation and skew it's economic predictions... hmmm it almost sounds like this was designed from the bottom up to be the perfect token for trade.

    90. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Never buy Bitcoin above $4

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    91. Re:It's just a get rich quick scheme by st0nes · · Score: 1

      Those two anecdotes are stories of people hoping to magically get rich quick. The outcome is unsurprising.

      Exactly. There is a difference between 'investing' and 'gambling.' Those who don't know the difference get burned. Shame.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
  2. The headline is missing three words by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It should begin with:

    Surprising Exactly Nobody...

    Well, OK, surprising the poor suckers who bought into this high-tech reinvention of the classic pump-and-dump I guess, but no-one else.

    1. Re:The headline is missing three words by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      Ponzi scheme. You buy our pretend money backed by our 'er' marketing and you sell it too someone else for more and you keep all the profit, and the price of the coins will go up by 'THOUSANDS' of times and you will be a millionaire. You don't even need to buy them, you can make your own, after of course we have ground of the bulk of the easy to grind ones, you can buy those now cheap, they will be worth billions, all backed by our 100% guaranteed 'er' marketing campaign, 'er' yeah, 'um', secrecy, privacy, criminal transactions, cheating on taxes and US Federal Reserve bad (which of course it is, the root cause of corruption in the USA, honestly really is, you always have to sneak some truth in to sell any marketing campaign).

      Crypto currencies, the US Federal Reserve, why is it, they seem like much the same thing, hmm, I wonder. How different is bitcoin from the US dollar, when you are forced to borrow it when it exists fictitiously and only becomes real when you owe it (an illusion when you borrow it but real when you have to pay it back, how come you can't do that, perhaps that's why crypto was so popular in the US, you guys are used to funny money).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:The headline is missing three words by Maestro485 · · Score: 2

      Wait, are you seriously saying Bitcoin is basically the same as the US dollar?

      That's kinda batshit. I'm not sure what angle you're going for with the Federal Reserve comments either.

    3. Re:The headline is missing three words by asackett · · Score: 0

      Crypto currencies, the US Federal Reserve, why is it, they seem like much the same thing, hmm, I wonder.

      The primary difference being that the crypto-currencies are not backed by the full force of the US military, which can force you into buying the petrodollar, silly.

      When whatever Blackwater calls itself these days issues a crypto, it'll be worth something. :D

      --

      Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    4. Re:The headline is missing three words by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      How is bitcoin different to gold? Most gold isn't actually used -- it's just stored.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    5. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is bitcoin different to gold? Most gold isn't actually used -- it's just stored.

      Nobody is converting CPU time into gold.

      There's no 'fixed' amount of gold, and unlikely that we will run out of gold to mine in the near future. Some rich asshole could (and likely will) find more gold in an asteroid even if all of the gold on Earth is mined out.

    6. Re:The headline is missing three words by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How is bitcoin different to gold?

      Gold has a much longer history as a store of value, so it may have a much longer future as well.

      Historically, gold has been a poor investment. A century ago, gold was worth $20 per ounce, which was enough to buy a nice tailored suit. Today, gold is worth $1200 per ounce, which is enough to buy a nice tailored suit. Correcting for inflation, the ROI has been roughly 0%.

    7. Re:The headline is missing three words by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      There's no "fixed" amount of cryptocurrencies either. There are now more cryptocurrencies than currencies. Don't like one? Create a new one.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    8. Re:The headline is missing three words by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ponzi scheme.

      Bitcoin may be a bad investment, and likely it is, but it is NOT a Ponzi Scheme. If you think it is, you don't understand Bitcoin, you don't understand Ponzi Schemes, or both.

      There are many profound differences, but one obvious difference is that Ponzi Schemes are inherently fraudulent. Bitcoin is not. Investors know exactly what they are buying. All the information is on the table.

      In the Pantheon of con men, no one is on a higher pedestal than Carlo Pietro Giovanni Guglielmo Tebaldo Ponzi. He has no equal among swindlers. Satoshi Nakamoto isn't even in the same class.

    9. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no "fixed" amount of cryptocurrencies either. There are now more cryptocurrencies than currencies. Don't like one? Create a new one.

      You misunderstand what was "fixed"

      Read this

      Your thinking about just switching to another competing coin is the same as saying "I'm going to sell my gold and buy silver instead"

    10. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's going for the "Fiat currency" angle and it is absolutely a valid comparison ever since the dollar was removed from a commodity backing standard. A single type of commodity backing, metals, probably isn't that great of an idea but it could be diffused across a balance of asset classes. The actual exchange value could be arbitrated or traded openly.

    11. Re:The headline is missing three words by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      No, I'm expanding on what "fixed" really means. If someone can just create a cryptocurrency out of thin air, then the old notion of "fixed" is inadequate.

      It doesn't matter how easy it is to switch to another competing coin. The fact that a competitor can exist means supply has increased. If demand for a competitor is high, that affects the value of your coin whether or not you can sell it. And that makes it even worse because you can't do anything about it. At least with "real" money in a stock market, you can still trade. With crypto, per your own argument, you're stuck.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    12. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gold can be obtained from seawater, just not economically.

    13. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had a few people at work walk right into this.
      They were warned and the predictions of the nay-sayers were right on the money (or lack of it ;) ).

      In a morbid sort of way it was interesting watching. Same reason people watch car racing (Just for the crashes).

    14. Re:The headline is missing three words by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      There's a definite limit to how much gold is on Earth, and it's surprisingly small:

      https://www.bbc.com/news/magaz...

      --
      No sig today...
    15. Re:The headline is missing three words by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      I had a few (supposedly) smart people tell me last December that you only had to but 1 bitcoin now and you had your retirement totally sorted out.

      --
      No sig today...
    16. Re:The headline is missing three words by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A Ponzi scheme is one where returns for early investors are paid out by later investors.

      That is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for a Ponzi Scheme. Ponzi schemes masquerade as legitimate investments, generating dividends. They are frauds. Bitcoin does NOT do this. There are no dividends and EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT. If you own a stake in a Ponzi scheme, you make money from the dividends, and you have no incentive to sell your stake. With Bitcoin, you can ONLY make money by selling to a "greater fool" at a higher price, and EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT.

      Ponzi schemes have a single authority. Bitcoin does not.
      Ponzi schemes are fraudulent, with hidden information. Bitcoin is not, it is transparent.
      Ponzi schemes pay dividends. Bitcoin does not.
      Ponzi schemes do not rely on "greater fools". Bitcoin does.
      Ponzi schemes go up in value, and then suddenly collapse to zero once the truth comes out. Bitcoin is declining slowly, and no "truth" is being hidden.

    17. Re:The headline is missing three words by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "Gold has a much longer history as a store of value [...] Historically, gold has been a poor investment"

      Which is only good, as that's exactly what we want good money to do: store and represent value, but not creating value on itself.

    18. Re:The headline is missing three words by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 0

      The problem is economies grow. So you need a currency that grows along with it, and allows the economy to grow at reasonable pace.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    19. Re:The headline is missing three words by someoneOtherThanMe · · Score: 1

      Nobody is converting CPU time into gold.

      But they are mining it, i.e. converting energy, human work, and a few other resources to gold. More or less the same thing.

    20. Re: The headline is missing three words by reiterate · · Score: 0

      Managed to make it to the common room before they took you back to bed again, eh? Good man. Fuck them and their jello priveleges, the truth shall be heard!

    21. Re:The headline is missing three words by turbidostato · · Score: 0

      "Crypto currencies, the US Federal Reserve, why is it, they seem like much the same thing, hmm, I wonder. How different is bitcoin from the US dollar"

      In that they both are fiat currencies? Yes, they are much the same.

      Fiat currencies are supported by a collective illusion of value. *Working* fiat currencies have the means to *impose* the illusion to those that disbelieve it. In the case of the USA dollar that's USA's federal government, their tax collectors and their standing army. In the case of bitcoins is...?

    22. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 0

      Wait, are you seriously saying Bitcoin is basically the same as the US dollar?

      That's kinda batshit. I'm not sure what angle you're going for with the Federal Reserve comments either.

      Well the Federal Reserve is privately owned and I find it interesting that people think that a central reserve is any different from a centrally planned economy.

      Just sayin

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    23. Re:The headline is missing three words by Mjlner · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How is bitcoin different to gold?

      Gold has a much longer history as a store of value, so it may have a much longer future as well.

      AND gold is actually usable for stuff other than as a currency. People like and buy gold jewelry. Gold also has industrial applications, so there will be a market for it. You will always find a buyer. The usability of bitcoin other than as a currency? Hmm... I just can't think of anything.

      Historically, gold has been a poor investment. A century ago, gold was worth $20 per ounce, which was enough to buy a nice tailored suit. Today, gold is worth $1200 per ounce, which is enough to buy a nice tailored suit. Correcting for inflation, the ROI has been roughly 0%.

      I would not call that a poor investment. I call that a stable saving strategy. Will it make you rich quick? No, but it won't make you poor either.

      --
      Lemon curry???
    24. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry but you are wrong, there IS A FIXED AMOUNT OF GOLD. Like every other resource gold is not infinite. Sure you can go on with your "mine it form asteroids" argument but in real life if you must spend more money to mine than what the gold is worth that is a no go.

    25. Re: The headline is missing three words by peragrin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Except I can buy things with a dollar, ruble or euro.

      I can't buy stuff with 99.99% of crypto currency . Companies stopped accepting it, as the value flycated to much,and transaction times took days.

      Banks,credit cards process hundreds of million of transactions a day. Bitcoin could barely do 3 orders of magnitude less.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    26. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bernie Madoff is worth mentioning perhaps?

    27. Re: The headline is missing three words by stinkyjak · · Score: 0

      I really think rtb is on to something here. FIAT money controled by a select few is the equivalent to slavery. I wish the concept decentralized curency would win. There is too much power at stake for that to ever happen. So it shouldn't surprise anyone to see crypto fail.

    28. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gold has an intrinsic value and real life application., Its electrical conductivity is the best amongs metals and it can be molded and shaped using low energy tools. Crypto coins are just a bunch of bits stored somewhere.

    29. Re: The headline is missing three words by stinkyjak · · Score: 0

      "Nobody is covering CPU time into gold..." AWS, Azure, .... do it consistently.

    30. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, the Federal Reserve is not privately owned. And it's also totally different from a planned economy. Duh.

    31. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Federal Reserve is not privately owned.

      Are you sure?

      And it's also totally different from a planned economy. Duh.

      Well I did say I find it interesting.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    32. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Ponzi schemes have a single authority. Bitcoin does not.
      Ponzi schemes are fraudulent, with hidden information.

      Let me introduce you to MMM. It's a decentralized completely transparent Ponzi scheme! Buy now!

    33. Re: The headline is missing three words by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You haven't solved the problem of money supply, management of which is what central banks specifically do. The cryptocurrency experience proves that just holding the money supply constant is not a solution, because since the stock of goods that money exchanges for increases with time, a fixed money supply just turns your currency into a hoarded investment, no longer useful as money.

      The value of every fiat currency depends on how well its central bank keeps the money supply in track with the stock of fungible assets in the national economy. Producing slightly too much currency every year, as our Federal Reserve does, is a better approach than any of the cryptocurrencies out there.

    34. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 5, Informative

      Are you sure?

      Yup. The US Federal Reserve System is a stand-alone government entity, like the National Park Service or the IRS. What trips some people is the fact that the Fed uses multiple private banks to perform its duties instead of a single government bank like in most of other countries. This is no different from Pentagon using Boeing or Lockheed to build its planes.

    35. Re:The headline is missing three words by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Because the supply of gold increases at a percent or two a year with physical mining, the gold stock tracks the value of fungible goods more closely than any of the cryptocurrencies, causing its price to stay more in line with long-term reality. All cultures have accorded it value since the beginning of history, and because of its high density it is relatively easy to assay.

    36. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Some observers mistakenly consider the Federal Reserve to be a private entity because the Reserve Banks are organized similarly to private corporations."

      https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

      That took literally less than 30 seconds to check.

    37. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except by definition you don't. If the money supply is tied to gold and the gold is mined out the economy continues to grow. The value of a dollar goes up and up and up. Eventually it will be most certainly worth it to aquire that space gold because doing so means you and you alone will get initial access to very valuable dollars

    38. Re:The headline is missing three words by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Gold is far from the best electrical conductor. In fact copper is significantly better, with the best conductor with a higher conductivity is silver. Gold is prized because it does not oxidize so it is great for none switching contact surfaces where both copper and silver oxidize and create high resistances. Note however silver is generally better in a switch than gold where the oxide layer can be broken through by the mechanical action of the switch and/or where an arc can be expected (anything higher than 0.5A at 11V DC).

    39. Re: The headline is missing three words by mikeabbott420 · · Score: 1

      Free Silver!

      --
      This program was made possible by a grant from the Ultra-Humanite, and viewers like you.
    40. Re:The headline is missing three words by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Copper oxidizes. gold is very useful partly because it is so easy to keep pure, so soft, and because it does not react easily chemically, it remains at a premium for electrical connectors.

    41. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its a good thing the FED never lies....oh wait.

    42. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the Federal Reserve is not privately owned.

      Are you sure?

      I don't know. Are you unable to read wikipedia?

    43. Re: The headline is missing three words by stinkyjak · · Score: 0

      While I agree with you, I still see how a decentralized and universal currency could be good for all that donâ(TM)t manipulate it for power. I donâ(TM)t know how a concept could ever be implemented in a practical way.

    44. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 0

      "Some observers mistakenly consider the Federal Reserve to be a private entity because the Reserve Banks are organized similarly to private corporations."

      https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm

      That took literally less than 30 seconds to check.

      Well according to the link you sent me it says: (1) a central governing board--the Federal Reserve Board of Governors; (2) a decentralized operating structure of 12 Federal Reserve Banks; and (3) a blend of public and private characteristics.

      So, it has a board (1), Shareholders (2) and (3) if it looks like a duck and quacks....

      FYI - here is a list of the FEDs 12 shareholders- - Rothschild Bank of London - Rothschild Bank of Berlin - Lazard Brothers of Paris - Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy - Warburg Bank of Amsterdam - Warburg Bank of Hamburg - Lehman Brothers of New York - Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York - Goldman, Sachs of New York - Chase Manhattan Bank of New York

      Well I guess you can scrub Lehman Brothers. So the FED says it's organized similarly to private corporations but it isn't the same thing. Uh Huh! very interesting.

      I'm gonna leave you with Section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act where they talk about appointing members of the Board. All I had to do is read the link you sent me - thanks.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    45. Re:The headline is missing three words by Sique · · Score: 1
      The value of gold is quite limited, because jewellery also has a limited value. If the economy is bad, the value of jewellery bottoms out, as no one will buy it. Yes, there are a few industrial uses for gold, manly in electronics and in chemistry, but they use only 10% of the world's supply. About half of the gold goes into two countries: China and India. Why? Because there, the marriage gifts for brides are traditionally made of gold. So China uses 30% and India about 25% of the world's gold supply to marry their daughters.

      I wonder if it makes sense to have a currency whose value is based mainly on the marriage traditions of two countries.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    46. Re:The headline is missing three words by belthize · · Score: 1

      On Earth, yes. Available to Earth, still technically yes but closer to no.

      https://www.news.com.au/techno...

      $14,000,000,000,000,000 worth of metals in one asteroid somewhat upsets the cost model.

    47. Re:The headline is missing three words by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The tradition to gift gold exists basically in every country.
      The question is how much you give, and of course many now rather give money.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    48. Re: The headline is missing three words by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      It may have been a Freudian slip or possibly even recursive (don't know, just woke up) but the morons who come up with the headlines ARE nobodies, so their surprise is likely...

    49. Re:The headline is missing three words by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's a definite limit to how much gold is on Earth, and it's surprisingly small:

      https://www.bbc.com/news/magaz...

      The key is "mineable" gold. There may be only 175 thousand tons that are extractable from land, but there is an estimated 20 million tons in seawater; it's the cost to extract it that makes it uneconomical. If a way could be found to extract it cheaply, gold would follow the same path as aluminum.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    50. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You are wrong. US Federal Reserve isn't a government entity, it was just chartered, meaning it was started by gov but not a government entity. It's not private either. It is in fact more like a c-corp that's owned by member banks. In fact, anyone can start a bank, (just google how) and the bank becomes a member bank of one of the districts.

    51. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That and misunderstanding the word shareholders.

    52. Re:The headline is missing three words by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      It should begin with:

      Surprising Exactly Nobody...

      Well, OK, surprising the poor suckers who bought into this high-tech reinvention of the classic pump-and-dump I guess, but no-one else.

      I don't think it even surprised most of the investors. They just thought they would get out before it crashed. Oops!

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    53. Re:The headline is missing three words by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      No, I'm expanding on what "fixed" really means. If someone can just create a cryptocurrency out of thin air, then the old notion of "fixed" is inadequate.

      It doesn't matter how easy it is to switch to another competing coin. The fact that a competitor can exist means supply has increased. If demand for a competitor is high, that affects the value of your coin whether or not you can sell it. And that makes it even worse because you can't do anything about it. At least with "real" money in a stock market, you can still trade. With crypto, per your own argument, you're stuck.

      Wish I could mod you up- this is insightful and not something I'd thought about. Bitcoin was supposed to be deflationary because there was a limited amount; but it's impossible to be completely deflationary when anyone can come along and make a new crypto. Sure, bitcoin itself is limited- but Bitcoin can't ever have a monopoly on the crypto scene without the backing of a government. Something it was created to avoid. A major oversight from the creator of bitcoin.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    54. Re:The headline is missing three words by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      At that point, does it become cheaper to look for Gold outside of Earth- or get it from sea water?

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    55. Re:The headline is missing three words by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      The tradition to gift gold exists basically in every country.
      The question is how much you give, and of course many now rather give money.

      I give the wife rhodium plated silver now instead. Cost is much cheaper- and she always wanted "white" gold anyway- so the look isn't any different. She's fine with that.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    56. Re:The headline is missing three words by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      Gold is useful, but you only need a thin layer. Only 10% of the mined gold goes to industry, and we have a century worth of gold stockpiled. This doesn't help to explain the high price.

    57. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Are you sure?

      Yup. The US Federal Reserve System is a stand-alone government entity, like the National Park Service or the IRS.

      I can see where you're confused. I checked the Federal Reserve Act. The Government part is the Board of Governors, the rest is corporate. Otherwise you wouldn't have a "Chairman of the Board". Nor would you have Section under the Federal Reserve Act for appointing a board. I was only trying to point out it was privately owned, which it clearly is, not that it was privately controlled - which it looks like it is according to the act.

      What trips some people is the fact that the Fed uses multiple private banks to perform its duties instead of a single government bank like in most of other countries.

      Well that's the privately owned part I was talking about. The thing that *really* trips me up is Section 4, Part 4 of the Federal Reserve Act

      refers to its organization as a corporation:

      4. General corporate powers

      Upon the filing of such certificate with the Comptroller of the Currency as aforesaid, the said Federal reserve bank shall become a body corporate and as such, and in the name designated in such organization certificate, shall have power--

      First. To adopt and use a corporate seal.

      Second. To have succession after the approval of this Act until dissolved by Act of Congress or until forfeiture of franchise for violation of law.

      Third. To make contracts

      Fourth. To sue and be sued, complain and defend, in any court of law or equity.

      Fifth. To appoint by its board of directors a president, vice presidents, and such officers and employees as are not otherwise provided for in this Act, to define their duties, require bonds for them and fix the penalty thereof, and to dismiss at pleasure such officers or employees.

      It goes on with directors and so on then Section 24 talks about how to qualify shareholders. If it wasn't privately owned, which is true otherwise Section 24 would not exist however I wasn't trying to claim it was a corporation, which now I've had a look at the Act, it clearly is arranged that way, a Chartered Corporation (I think).

      Btw - I already pointed out the List of federal reserve shareholders (The private owners) to Mr AC in case you were interested.

      This is no different from Pentagon using Boeing or Lockheed to build its planes.

      So the government uses the banks to set its monetary policy for the taxpayer. hmmmm, I'm not sure that's such a good idea.

      Perhaps it is time to question your assumptions?

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    58. Re:The headline is missing three words by shaitand · · Score: 1

      The tech is solid. This wasn't pumped and dumped by the early adopters of bitcoin, it was pumped and dumped by the same people who pump and dump all the speculative markets.

    59. Re:The headline is missing three words by bws111 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whole lotta crazy there. The 'board' is a federal agency, appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.

      Any net income (profit) the banks earn goes directly to the US Treasury, not the 'shareholder' banks.

      There is no such thing as 'the 12 shareholders'. Every bank that is part of the federal reserve system is a shareholder - there are approx 3000 of them.

      I have no idea what you think is in that link you sent that supports your position in any way. Is this one of those things where if you take the third letter of every word it spells out a secret message or something?

    60. Re: The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Federal Reserve is not privately owned.

      Are you sure?

      I don't know. Are you unable to read wikipedia?

      I prefer to go straight to the Federal Reserve Act to sort it out from there.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    61. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Wow - people are really uncomfortable with ideas that challenge their assumptions. Check the Federal Reserve Act and have a nice day.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    62. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean by "stand-alone"? That term seems to imply the NPS and IRS are not themselves part of executive departments. The National Park Service is part of the Department of the Interior, and the IRS is part of the Department of the Treasury. Both departments are standard U.S. federal executive departments.

    63. Re: The headline is missing three words by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      A major oversight from the creator of bitcoin

      Or not.

    64. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      So what? All your claims are the strawman that you set up, I made no claim to profit, the board of governors. My only claim was that it is privately owned, it clearly IS according to the ACT.

      There is no such thing as 'the 12 shareholders'. Every bank that is part of the federal reserve system is a shareholder .

      The Federal Reserve act talks about share allocations in Sec 4.2

      Whole lotta crazy there.

      I think you need to calm down.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    65. Re: The headline is missing three words by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Companies stopped accepting it,

      Only the companies that were pathetic and desperate enough to start accepting it in the first place...

    66. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ponzi scheme. You buy our pretend money backed by our 'er' marketing and you sell it too someone else for more and you keep all the profit, and the price of the coins will go up by 'THOUSANDS' of times and you will be a millionaire.

      I'm really amazed people posting on slashdot are such luddites that they don't understand the value of bitcoin. To say it's just "pretend money" seems really shortsighted. There have been ABSURD levels of hype around bitcoin but make no mistake, blockchain is a legitimately useful technology.

      As far as it being a ponzi scheme, one bitcoin today is worth $6,680.65. On August 22, 2013 it was worth $123.30. That's one hell of a ponzi scheme. The current value is 10x what it was when I purchased bitcoin a couple years ago (yes, I still own it). There is no other investment I would have (or even could have, personally) made that would have returned anything even remotely close to this.

    67. Re:The headline is missing three words by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      Lots of gold being mined, though of course there is a limit, growth of paper economies is mostly all debt

    68. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      which is enough to buy a nice tailored suit.

      You do know that "a nice tailored suit" introduces all sorts of variables that more or less make the comparison inviable. For one, "a nice tailored suit" isn't essential, and being so implies that the "tailor hourly cost" is a lot more flexible than, say, "coal miner hourly cost".

    69. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is bitcoin different to gold?

      Gold has a much longer history as a store of value, so it may have a much longer future as well.

      Historically, gold has been a poor investment. A century ago, gold was worth $20 per ounce, which was enough to buy a nice tailored suit. Today, gold is worth $1200 per ounce, which is enough to buy a nice tailored suit. Correcting for inflation, the ROI has been roughly 0%.

      Ok but if you had a $20 bill and didn't invest in gold you will still only have $20 vs $1,200 soooooooo...

    70. Re:The headline is missing three words by 605dave · · Score: 1

      I can hold it in my hand

      --
      Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
    71. Re:The headline is missing three words by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      No, not lots of gold being mined. In fact, very little. Lots of ground is being dug up and ruined, but gold yield is low, and the amount of gold being added to reserves do not match the real material growth of an economy.

      Whether or not you think a debt driven economy is a good thing, the fact is a gold driven economy doesn't grow. No one wants to spend their gold because it is hard to get back. That's why all dictatorships in history (ie, kingdoms and theocracies) loved gold - wealth is much easier to control - and why those dictatorships stayed poor - because no one wants to spend. Judging by your comment history, you seem to be one of those gold-standard libertarians. It's funny how people like you actually want to go back to the old system of being oppressed over a rare metal. You'd think people with an unhealthy obsession with a free market would also want market forces to decide the value of money.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    72. Re:The headline is missing three words by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Owning something means that it belongs to you. You can sell it. You can keep the profits. You can gift it to someone else. You can do with it what you please. None of those are true with the Fed. There IS NO OWNER, no matter how much you want to claim there is.

      Here is a list of the member banks of the fed (as of 2014). Every one of them is a 'shareholder' in the fed. I have no idea where this silly '12 shareholders' nonsense comes from

    73. Re:The headline is missing three words by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      At that point, does it become cheaper to look for Gold outside of Earth- or get it from sea water?

      The challenge is once the price reaches the point either i economically viable, especially for seawater, how long does the price stay high until the volume extracted causes the price to crash? It's a bit like oil; if price gets high enough to make shale oil profitable, other producers can up production to drive down the price and shutdown shale oil production; the main difference is the volume of crude available limits how long they ca do that.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    74. Re:The headline is missing three words by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I can't see how that would run into problems at all. Hey, can I buy that food with this cryptocurrency I just whipped up last night? Sure, I'm the only one that has any of it, but you can totally try to sell it to someone else after I've unloaded my fake bullshit onto you for real goods!

      You've just suggested that everyone starts printing their own money and claim it has more value than the heat you can get from burning the paper it's on, which it doesn't.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    75. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If supply arbitrarily increases (it does, with each new crypto that people try to scam^H^H^H^H sell to investors) and value distributes across the new supply (it doesn't, but just for argument) then you've just diluted the value of all of the supply of cryptocurrency unless overall value increases as well.

      As the value is 100% based on speculation, all arbitrary increase of supply will see a similar massive deflation of value when the speculation bubble pops.

    76. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Gold also has industrial applications,

      I have developed a way to plate my http connections with Bitcoin. You are welcome to invest in it, but right now, I am keeping the technology to myself.

    77. Re:The headline is missing three words by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a safe place to keep already attained wealth to me - indexed nicely to inflation over long periods of time.

      What savings bond or certificate of deposit can say the same?

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    78. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Owning something means that it belongs to you. You can sell it. You can keep the profits. You can gift it to someone else. You can do with it what you please. None of those are true with the Fed.

      That's what owning means to you. Owning shares in a reserve bank means power

      There IS NO OWNER, no matter how much you want to claim there is.

      Again with the strawman, I said privately owned what that means to the owners is a whole lot different to what you believe it means AND NO AMOUNT OF CAPS WILL CHANGE THAT.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    79. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You committing a classic fallacy here. While Crypto does not YOUR very narrow definition of a ponzi scheme it does meet mine. This crash has come as a shock to non of the people who have been calling crypto a scam for years.

      If you desperately need to not call crypo a ponzi then find and replace with "Pump and Dump" or "Emperors new cloths" as needed.

    80. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We had deflation throughout the 19th century, and yet, somehow, the economy continued to function.

    81. Re:The headline is missing three words by nbritton · · Score: 1

      IIRC, if you adjust the price of gold to the PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures) index it's basically a flat line. Gold is a very good value store. The sad part is if you also adjust incomes based on the PCE then we are basically working for slave labor wages... you would have to be making $250k to have the same income as an average family in the 1950s.

    82. Re: The headline is missing three words by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Bernie Madoff is worth mentioning perhaps?

      Bernie Madoff was not in the same league as Charles Ponzi. Madoff scammed some people, got caught, went to jail, end of story. Ponzi did so much more. He went to jail repeatedly, was released, and then started new scams, over and over. Not only that, but he was such an effective scammer, that in many cases he ripped off the SAME PEOPLE more than once. Some of his victims went to their grave believing that Ponzi was a great man, and that their "investments" would have done fine if only the government had stopped persecuting the poor guy.

    83. Re:The headline is missing three words by gweihir · · Score: 1

      The clueless are legion. So this surprises a lot of people and even more are unwilling to believe it in the first place, despite hard evidence. It actually is "Surprising nobody with a minimal clue...", which does imply "Surprising a great many people...".

      Yes, people are _this_ stupid and most are unable to learn from experience in addition.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    84. Re:The headline is missing three words by gweihir · · Score: 1

      About 20% of Gold is actually used industrially and is hard to replace there. That makes is an ultra-hard value compared to Bitcoin with 0% actual industrial usage.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    85. Re:The headline is missing three words by gweihir · · Score: 1

      It is a generalized version of a Ponzi-scheme. That makes it logically not a Ponzi-scheme, but it does share significant characteristics with the idea.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    86. Re:The headline is missing three words by gweihir · · Score: 1

      You seem to have problems with the generalization of an idea. This is a limitation of your mind, and not shared by everybody else. Also, you misrepresent how Ponzi-schemes work, implying you do not understand what you are talking about in the first place. Please go away.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    87. Re: The headline is missing three words by xtal · · Score: 1

      The internet used to be 300bps - if you were lucky, too. Who'd use something so primitive? Just send a fax.

      Read up on the Lightning Network. There are other technologies actively being built on the BTC blockchain.

      People expect instant adoption. It'll be 10, 20, maybe 30 years. But BTC is not going away.

      Should you invest your house in it? No.

      Should you understand it? Probably.

      Are there opportunities to make money? Absolutely.

      The first step is deciding Bticoin has some sort of value. We're there, I think.

      The next step is deciding what that value is. Not done with that yet.

      There is one thing you can only buy with Bitcoin. That's access to the BTC Blockchain. You should read up on the BIP proposals being worked on, Lightning, and other rapidly developing technologies before discounting offhand, and likely at your peril.

      --
      ..don't panic
    88. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We had deflation throughout the 19th century, and yet, somehow, the economy continued to function.

      Cross of Gold speech

    89. Re:The headline is missing three words by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      ...AND gold is actually usable for stuff other than as a currency.

      You left out it is fungible and easily sellable. Like, give me a bar of gold and I can turn into cash in any major city in less than the time it takes a bitcoin transaction to go through. Now, I'll pay a premium for that fast service, but I may actually pay less of a premium than bitcoin transaction fees.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    90. Re:The headline is missing three words by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      You seem to have problems with the generalization of an idea.

      The generalized idea is a "pyramid scheme".

      Is a Ponzi scheme a pyramid scheme? Definitely.

      Is Bitcoin a pyramid scheme? Possibly.

      Does that mean that Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme? No, of course not.

      An apple is a fruit. An orange is a fruit. But that doesn't mean that an apple is an orange.

    91. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly the point of gold being used as a store of value. If you still had that $20 from a century ago in cash form, what could you buy with it today, maybe 3 beers and tip?

      If I had idle cash, id rather it be spent to buy gold than to sit in a savings account collecting the worthless interest rate most banks are offering these days, or gambling it in the stock market. At least I know 30 years from now that gold i bought 30 years ago will probably still have the buying power as the cash i spent on it 30 years ago.

    92. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't. That's the problem with Bitcoin.

      Gold backed currency is a dumb idea and Bitcoin has all the same flaws.

    93. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what of the congressional hearing about the FED Missing trillion $, I think Bernie was there among others. It's on youtube.

    94. Re:The headline is missing three words by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      Which is why it was long used as a "standard" to provide an absolute reference for value. This was eliminated in order to permit fiscially irresponsible government spending.

    95. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a problem. It's a blessing.
      Furthermore the quantitative theory of money doesn't really hold water: when the real economy is thriving, adding more money doesn't seem to inflate consumer prices -- no matter what the FED and mainstream economist claim. The (hyper)inflation is the problem of non functional economies -- those who lack means and insentive to produce.
      Conversely, I'd hypothesize, economies can grow and function on shrinking monetary base. Money doesn't matter -- up to a point -- if it's honest. After all, economics is about purchasing products with products. At the end of each day, if everything is traded, a single coin is enough to finalize all transactions -- and then the coin can be lent to next time zone...
      Instead, the government issued fiat currencies (and the debt driven economies) are made explicitly to circumvent the trading principle: with newly minted money anyone can buy from the markets before he has made any services to it -- with honest money every prodigal son needs his own sugar daddy to back up his purchasing power.

    96. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What ever you claim is the price of bc or a stock, it's only a spot price -- the median/mean of some individual buyer willing to offer and some seller willing to part his belongings. The reality of the overall value of every bitcoin owned or the price one can actually buy 100% of Amazon (or sell it) is a completely other issue.

    97. Re:The headline is missing three words by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 2

      The reason Free Silver was a thing back in the 19th century was the economy was growing so fast that debtors were getting crushed by deflation. If the economic production of the US increases by 50% while the supply of gold only increases by 10%, then money-is-gold squeezes economic growth.

      There is no particular reason to expect gold to be mined at the "correct" amount in any given decade. Obviously it does not have to precisely match economic growth, but it would be useful if there were any reason to believe these things were tied together on a timescale shorter than centuries.

    98. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >The usability of bitcoin other than as a currency? Hmm... I just can't think of anything.

      It has been used as a store for information since the beginning

      https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Genesis_block

      Companies also seem to have chosen forking bitcoin for their own information stores.

    99. Re:The headline is missing three words by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      You'd think people with an unhealthy obsession with a free market would also want market forces to decide the value of money.

      You put your finger on an interesting point. I think it comes down to a strong personal distrust of gov't being sufficiently important, from a certain point of view, that a (overly?) narrow and restricted version of the "free market" is an acceptable price to pay.

      Why the anonymous politically connected oligarchs that are gaining control over the various cryptocurrencies are so much more trustworthy than duly elected-by-the-public politicians who happen to owe oligarchs some favors is a question that I do not think has a convincing answer.

    100. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like Bitcoin conferences?

    101. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am just going to throw my uneducated 2 cents here but I always understood the fed being a "corporation" as meaning that they're a legal corporation ran by the government. More a legal entity than a business or something.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_the_United_States

    102. Re:The headline is missing three words by Sique · · Score: 1

      The tradition might exist everywhere else, but two countries use 55%, more than half of the world's gold supply for bride's gifts. Yes, they are the most popoulos countries of the world, but even together, they only have about 30% of the world's population. It means, that on average, a bride in India or China has six times more gold than everyone else -- and that already includes the 15% of the world's gold stored in the diverse capital reserves of the central banks.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    103. Re: The headline is missing three words by bws111 · · Score: 2

      You are making a serious mistake. You are confusing a technology with a particular product that uses that technology. Cryptocurrency (blockchain) is the technology, Bitcoin is a product that uses the technology.

      While there may be very good reasons to think that in 10, 20, or 30 years cryptocurrency will be in widespread use, there is ZERO reason to believe that Bitcoin will be the particular cryptocurrency in widespread use.

      'We' have not decided that BTC has any value. 'We' may have decided that cryptocurrency has some value. Big difference.

      How many car manufacturers at the turn of the 20th century survived long enough to see the widespread adoption of cars? How many internet companies at the start of the internet boom survived? How many PC companies at the start of the PC era survived to see widespead adoption?

    104. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd. No where in the act does it say the Fed is publicly owned. From reading your other posts, I believe your confusing is you believe shareholders are owners. They aren't.

    105. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, totally wrong and modded insightful.
      Nice work keeping the public totally misinformed.
      Signed, the shareholder banks of the Federal Reserve.

    106. Re:The headline is missing three words by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      You're talking out your ass. Gold is an investment with significant risk the only thing that it has in common with bonds or CDs is that it's not going to track the stock market. Having a diverse stock portfolio complimented by a bond ETF, negative beta stock ETF, a little gold, treasuries, and enough cash to get you by until your next treasury matures is how you're going to keep already attained wealth.
      Then when the stock market tanks you evaluate which investments didn't track it and use those to buy cheap stocks.

      Have you considered that your interests may not be the first ones considered by whoever is providing your investment advice?

    107. Re:The headline is missing three words by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      Ummm, most of them? Bonds and CDs are generally in-line with inflation. If you insist on a sure-thing inflation hedge, how about TIPS? Nowhere near as volatile as gold and will always keep up with inflation.

      Yes, over time gold has appreciated at about the rate of inflation, but so has most real property. If you're a long-term investor then you're way better off investing in equities - you can either make the rate of inflation with gold or make a much better return with equities.

      --

      Enigma

    108. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok but if you had a $20 bill and didn't invest in gold you will still only have $20

      Not quite, if you had a 100 year old $20 it would range in cost from $100 to $2000 to a collector depending on rarity and condition.

    109. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ironically they were right it would be sorted out. if you bought then, there would be no question about what you would be doing during your retirement, you would need to keep working.

    110. Re:The headline is missing three words by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      In case you didn't read my other comments, I was pointing out that was the problem with cryptocurrency.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    111. Re:The headline is missing three words by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      It took me a while to come upon a similar insight.

      As I see it: The underlying value of Bitcoin is somewhat tied to the network of people and miners who accept/work this stuff. But even that not fixed in any meaningful sense at all. Miners are incentivized to be highly mercenary, and to service the larger crypto ecosystem by moving to where the biggest bounties can be found. So every cryptocurrency is a direct competitor to every other similar cryptocurrency in a very fundamental way. It does not matter whether Bitcoin specifically is designed to be deflationary or inflationary. The larger ecosystem can experience strong inflation/deflation as a whole, or an individual currency can suffer such within the ecosystem.

    112. Re:The headline is missing three words by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      There is also a weird mindblowing question of whether Bitcoin is inflationary because of itself when it forks. If I owe you 1000 XCoin a year from now and there is a community-accepted fork for good technical reasons six months from now, what do I owe you? Can I spend my coin on the new ledger and pay you from the old ledger? Who decides what XCoin is really an XCoin?

    113. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you like LOSING MONEY that is.
      Damn some people are stupid.
      Of course I'll take my pay in any non inflationary decentralized cryptocurrency. And I'll spend it when I need to.

      Also artificially propping up economies with forced spending due to inflation or any other reason or non reason, particularly when driven by "governments" to favor banks and corporations as they always do... is unethical and flat out sinful abomination in needless Earth and humanity destroying consumerism etc.

      Decentralized cryptocurrencies were invented to END all that bullshit lies that's been foisted on people's for hundred to thousands of years.

    114. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bullshit. Troll.

      You can buy a lot of goods and services with
      primarily
      Bitcoin Cash BCH
      Bitcoin Core BTC
      and also
      Ethereum ETH

      You're absolutely right, 99.9% of cryptocurrencies are shitcoins and not worth anything beyond their technical and social research and development projects.

      And ALL centralized cryptocurrencies are worthless shitcoins... use fucking fiat instead.

      Now Decentralized Cryptocurrencies like BCH and privacy coins like Zcash ZEC Bitcoin Private BTCP Zencash ZEN... are all reasonably leading long term currencies.

    115. Re:The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Decentralized Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Cash BCH, ZEN, BTCP, BTC, etc....
      None of their earlies get paid out from futures.
      It's a straight up buy in and sell out.

      Whenever you see anyone claiming "PONZI"... they're a TROLL and can be ignored.

    116. Re:The headline is missing three words by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It is most likely not "gold supply" but new mined gold.

      And actually I doubt the numbers ... on the other hand 55% of new gold going to 30% of the population of the planet is not that unreasonable.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    117. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      got a link? I wouldn't mind checking that out.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    118. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      "Stand-alone" in the sense that the NPS and the IRS are both sovereign within their domain. They are not ruled directly by the executive branch, and instead operate autonomously based on the laws passed by the Congress. Compare this with the State Dept which is directly controlled by the President (through his appointees).

    119. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Again, you're just glossing over everything. Stocks in the Fed are the way to participate for the membership FDIC-insured banks. They don't confer the power to set the policy. Also, your list is just a pure BS from a conspiracy site.

      http://www.usagold.com/federal... - here's a nice discussion.

    120. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      You said: The US Federal Reserve System is a stand-alone government entity, like the National Park Service or the IRS. this is clearly not the case. I said the FED was privately owned which means it is not owned by the everyday, average man on the street taxpayer.

      Again, you're just glossing over everything.

      You are at once saying the above and Stocks in the Fed are the way to participate for the membership FDIC-insured banks Can a bank purchase stocks in the IRS? No so, clearly the Federal Reserve is like no other government entity, clearly it is a unique structure.

      Is the Federal Reserve owned by private banking interests? Yes it is, therefore it is privately owned. What "owning" means is a different discussion.

      Even encyclopedia Britannica says A Federal Reserve bank is a privately owned corporation established pursuant to the Federal Reserve Act to serve the public interest; . So does that mean all of the 12 member banks that own shares in the Federal Reserve Corporation privately owned? Yes they are. Are the other member banks privately owned? yes they are. Does the Federal Reserve "stand-alone" without these member banks? No it does not.

      Therefore the Federal Reserve can't be described as "a stand-alone government entity" because it isn't.

      Also, your list is just a pure BS from a conspiracy site.

      You are engaging in double think. Look at the act for yourself. Calling everything a conspiracy is a way of reducing the variables to one thing you can refute with minimum thought. Nothing personal but calling something a conspiracy theory is like admitting you're not capable of examining the arguments rationally because it means challenging your assumptions and thinking - please see my sig.

      Obviously people paradigms are challenged by this information so show me where the budget funds the federal reserve to back up what you say if indeed this all is a conspiracy. The LAW spells out how the Federal Reserve behaves and is structured with history left to describe why it got that way. There is nothing conspiratorial about looking at the facts in law and drawing a conclusion as opposed to someone's opinion to support a point. If you don't agree, that's fine, however throwing your emotional turds at me isn't what I qualify as a convincing argument.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    121. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      I said the FED was privately owned which means it is not owned by the everyday, average man on the street taxpayer.

      Incorrect. Fed is not privately owned. Its member banks are. They have no impact on Fed policy which is set by its board, appointed directly by the President. Fed also operates under the charter provided by the Congress.

      And even individual Fed banks are only "private". Their "owners" can not hold more than $25k in its stock, this stock can't sold, loaned or used as a collateral.

    122. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      You are engaging in double think. Look at the act for yourself. Calling everything a conspiracy is a way of reducing the variables to one thing you can refute with minimum thought.

      Nope. You're just snatching the first dubious links from anti-Semitic conspiracy websites in order to affirm your believes. Without even a cursory attempt to double-check them.

    123. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      I said the FED was privately owned which means it is not owned by the everyday, average man on the street taxpayer.

      Incorrect. Fed is not privately owned. Its member banks are. They have no impact on Fed policy which is set by its board, appointed directly by the President. Fed also operates under the charter provided by the Congress. And even individual Fed banks are only "private". Their "owners" can not hold more than $25k in its stock, this stock can't sold, loaned or used as a collateral.

      None of which changes that it is privately owned.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    124. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      You are engaging in double think. Look at the act for yourself. Calling everything a conspiracy is a way of reducing the variables to one thing you can refute with minimum thought.

      Nope. You're just snatching the first dubious links from anti-Semitic conspiracy websites in order to affirm your believes. Without even a cursory attempt to double-check them.

      The Federal Reserve Act is the link I sent you.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    125. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      I read this act. Have you? A trick question: who owns the shares of Fed that very offered to public?

    126. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      No, it's not. Member banks own the shares, but they don't own the bank and have no input on its governing. Mostly because of the peculiarities of its "shares".

    127. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Yes. They aren't offered to the public.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    128. Re:The headline is missing three words by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      https://www.businessinsider.co...

      Lol I saw this story today and I remembered this thread. I love the stupidity of gold fetishists.
      [quote]
      The precious metal is down 8% so far in 2018, and nearly 14% on an annualized basis — making it the worst-performing major asset class this year according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch.[/quote]

      I especially love when they go into long detailed defenses of gold with lots of smart sounding words and references to historical crap...the smug, well read idiots.

    129. Re:The headline is missing three words by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      This is exactly the advice that Warren Buffet, Peter Lynch, and Bill Gates would give you......NOT!

    130. Re: The headline is missing three words by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      No the companies that accepted it wanted it to work. Look at Visa's stock. Payment processing is practically money for nothing in 2018. If my bank is able to kick me back 1.5 to 5% of the processing fees that vendors pay for the honor of accepting my money... how much money do you think Visa is keeping for themselves?

    131. Re: The headline is missing three words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe Satoshi was a bankster. He created the correct solution but gave us small blocks, no governance model, no sharding and 10 minute block times.

    132. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Here is a documentary film on the history of the US Federal Reserve that may help you understand and see through the rhetoric surrounding the institution.

      All the best to you.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    133. Re:The headline is missing three words by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      Nah, yet another conspiracy crap theory. Just read the Act itself, it's short and comprehensible.

    134. Re:The headline is missing three words by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Did you watch it?

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  3. Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Kim Hyon-jeong, a 45-year-old teacher and mother of one who lives on the outskirts of Seoul, said she put about 100 million won, or $90,000, into cryptocurrencies last fall. She drew on savings, an insurance policy and a $25,000 loan. Her investments are now down about 90 percent. "I thought that cryptocurrencies would be the one and only breakthrough for ordinary hardworking people like us," she said. "I thought my family and I could escape hardship and live more comfortably, but it turned out to be the other way around."

    Am I supposed to feel sorry for this person? I make a comfortable living (80k USD) and in lat e2017 I bought 350 dollars worth of Ethererum. By January I sold it all because even I, a non-college educated computer nerd could tell this shit was way too toxic to consider a 'long term' investment. Don't be an idiot like Kim.

    1. Re: Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope she doesn't teach anything important.

    2. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This killed me, from TFA:

      Tony Yoo, a financial analyst in Los Angeles, invested more than $100,000 of his savings last fall. At their lowest point, his holdings dropped almost 70 percent in value.

    3. Re: Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same reason people buy lottery tickets.

    4. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How in the hell did they manage to lose money when investing last fall? The gains between Nov 2017 and early Jan 2018 were astronomical. ETH alone went from ~$300 to $1400. Did they not know to sell?

      Honestly they're just stupid investors. Sell on the way up! Hunting for the peak is going to get you hurt. I sold in Dec 2017 at around $640 and I have no regrets.

    5. Re:Idiot by gordguide · · Score: 1

      How in the hell did they manage to lose money when investing last fall? The gains between Nov 2017 and early Jan 2018 were astronomical. ETH alone went from ~$300 to $1400. Did they not know to sell?

      Honestly they're just stupid investors. Sell on the way up! Hunting for the peak is going to get you hurt. I sold in Dec 2017 at around $640 and I have no regrets.

      Exactly. You ALWAYS sell when the price doubles, because that secures a 100% profit PLUS recovers your initial investment. With the other half still invested which has effectively cost you nothing (we don't count the profit because profit is the entire point of investing), speculate away.

      Using your numbers, buy ETH @ $300, sell half at $600, and if you were dumb enough not to sell half again at $1200, at least you doubled your money if it later falls to $0

      Of course there are other strategies besides selling at 2x your investment, but regardless, you should ALWAYS set a profit value (maybe just 10%, depends on what you're investing in and why) where you will sell some or all of your investment.

    6. Re:Idiot by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Am I supposed to feel sorry for this person? I make a comfortable living (80k USD) and in lat e2017 I bought 350 dollars worth of Ethererum. By January I sold it all

      No, you're meant to feel smug and superior because you've managed to con people like this teacher into handing their money to you.

      Sure, she's a fool. You however are why..

      this shit was way too toxic

    7. Re:Idiot by gweihir · · Score: 1

      These days they are not called "idiots", but "victims", even though here that is absolutely the same thing, as they did it to themselves. There is no profit in being the former, but there can be significant profit in being the latter. They basically claim that they were not utterly stupid, but that "somebody" did it to them and that they can legitimately ask for help for that reason.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  4. But wait! by msauve · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you heard about investing in tulip bulbs?

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:But wait! by linear+a · · Score: 1

      Where can I get some!!

    2. Re:But wait! by asackett · · Score: 1

      Always a pleasure to be of service. Here ya go: https://www.brecks.com/categor...

      --

      Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    3. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      very few people will get this joke :)

    4. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      very few? this "joke" is posted in every single bitcoin thread ever

    5. Re:But wait! by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      Hah. Forget tulips. I heard that someone had a bridge in Genoa.

    6. Re:But wait! by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      very few? this "joke" is posted in every single bitcoin thread ever

      Yeah- it's very overused. And not entirely analogous since there is a market for bitcoins still- even if it is just in the dark web. Bitcoin lost 75% of it's value- that's pretty steep but not all to nothing like the Tulips. It was definitely a bubble but it wasn't a tulip situation.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:But wait! by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      Hah. Forget tulips. I heard that someone had a bridge in Genoa.

      Better hurry. There was a big price drop and the bridge is half off. It won't last long.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    8. Re: But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet so many people reply "bitcoin is nothing like tulip bulbs", thus proving they don't get the joke.

    9. Re:But wait! by tttonyyy · · Score: 1

      At least with the tulip bubble, after the crash you still had pretty tulips.

      Some numbers in a shared ledger - less impressive.

      --
      biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
    10. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least you have the pleasure of being known as a cryptard.

    11. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call your bluff. There is no way you built a bridge out of salami.

      but it sounds delicious.

    12. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turns out this is no longer a good analogy for such things.

      http://theconversation.com/tulip-mania-the-classic-story-of-a-dutch-financial-bubble-is-mostly-wrong-91413

    13. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! Forget tulips!

      I have some prime Florida land real estate for sale!

      Better act quickly!

    14. Re: But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure there is still a market for tulips too. Let me know when they carry bitcoin at home depot.

    15. Re:But wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, not that crappy article again. The title of the article should be "How I got the story mostly wrong and then debunked the wrong thing". He goes to all this great effort proving how tulips were not some craze that nearly ruined the economy. The problem is, that's never the story I heard. All that I've ever heard is just that people just crazy for tulips and bought then at more and more ridiculous prices, thinking they were a sure thing and they would get rich....and then crash! Which is exactly what he proves...he even talked about how he found a record that someone bought one for "the price of a well-appointed house".

      Second, his whole argument is based around how few records he could find. Well surprise, surprise. For one thing, our records from back then aren't actually the most thorough. For another, why does he even expect that every tulip transaction would be documented? Even today, most bitcoin transactions have no public record at all, because they take place on the exchanges, and as those exchanges go bankrupt or just shutdown, even the private records will vanish. For those with public records....well that is only due to the fact that public records is an inherent part of the protocol. If that weren't the case, we'd have almost no records for transactions that happened this year, and 400 years from now some idiot would be saying "well, I couldn't find much documentation of the supposed crypto bubble, therefore it must never have happened". So no, I wouldn't expect there to be much in the way of records of tulip transactions, except possibly for those cases where the transaction ended up in a legal dispute, or for some other reason required legal involvement.

  5. My heart by Revek · · Score: 1

    Pumps piss for them. I would just settle for getting my eight bitcoins back.

    1. Re:My heart by VMaN · · Score: 2

      ooooh, is this one of those facebooky "please ask me about what I'm referring to"?

    2. Re:My heart by Revek · · Score: 1

      No its not.

    3. Re:My heart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You asked the wrong question. This isn't going to work if you don't play along.

  6. There's one born every minute... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

    A sucker I mean. This should be a lesson for the next round of "get rich quick" vaporware.

    1. Re:There's one born every minute... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      The next round will works just the same as this one did. The supply of suckers is endless.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  7. High potential returns means high risk by misnohmer · · Score: 2

    Whether stock market or a casino, gambling is taking high risks so nobody should be surprised if they lose their shirt. If you buy into something that returns significantly more than what you can borrow money at, of course it's high risk (or else the bank lending you money would buy those same investments instead of lending you money).

    1. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      If you buy into something that returns significantly more than what you can borrow money at, of course it's high risk (or else the bank lending you money would buy those same investments instead of lending you money).

      But if it's a bubble based on speculation on something that has no inherent worth, it's no longer a risk - it's a certainty.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:High potential returns means high risk by misnohmer · · Score: 1

      Not true. There is plenty of money to be made on speculation bubbles, just like in a casino, it is not impossible possible to win, just unlikely.

    3. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      No, it works like a casino. And our casino-style capitalism. Anyone can win. But not everyone.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      The money to be made _is for the casino itself_. Casinos kick out people who are noticed making money. The money to be made for the cryptocurrencies is at the exchanges, who keep being caught stealing bitcoins and who charge startling transaction costs while handling the cryptocurrency.

    5. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether stock market or a casino, gambling is taking high risks so nobody should be surprised if they lose their shirt.

      Actually the market goes up over time so if you're invested in a well diversified portfolio of multiple asset classes the risks that it all comes crashes down without ever recovering is the same as the world entering an apocalypse, at which point your shirt is the least of your concern.

      But the difference is that in that case you're investing your money in companies with actual intrinsic value, with real assets, real revenues that really do things in the real world. Sh*tcoins are nothing of the sort.

    6. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Not true. There is plenty of money to be made on speculation bubbles, just like in a casino, it is not impossible possible to win, just unlikely.

      For every person that won $900 in crypto another person lost $1000. It's not like Casino where it all goes to the house. It was an exchange of money from one fool to another with the exchange companies taking a bite here and there and the utility companies taking a chunk of the pie.

      There was a lot of money to be made by the lucky ones who sold before the bubble burst.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the casinos kick out anybody making too much money too consistently. If they kicked out anybody making any money they'd probably get sued, they'd definitely get themselves in trouble with the state games board and most importantly, who is going to want to go to a casino if nobody ever makes money? The draw of the casino is the chance of winning it big, and the stories of those who have. If those stories don't exist, the allure is gone. It becomes just throwing money away, not gambling.

      I've been noticed making money, they came by and watched me to make sure I wasn't cheating, but then left when it became obvious that I was on a statistically improbable but statistically inevitable hot streak. The only thing they were annoyed about is I left as soon as my luck ran out and didn't gamble my winnings away. But nobody asked me to leave nor took notice when I came back the next day.

    8. Re:High potential returns means high risk by misnohmer · · Score: 1

      How is exchanges taking their cut different from when you play for example Poker at the casino and they simply take rake from each pot?

    9. Re:High potential returns means high risk by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      House ends up with a lot higher percent of the pie in a casino. Slightly less than half Crypto speculators win and half lose. In a casino almost everyone loses.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  8. play stupid games, win stupid prizes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He said he now felt that he had wasted 10 months of his life trying to play the markets.

    There are some great big swingin' dicks playing the suckers trying to "play the markets," and at $4,000 you aren't a big swingin' dick. I do, however, know a prince in Nigeria who could use your help.

  9. promises? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the heck are these 'promises' they keep talking about? Bitcoin doesn't promise you any 'gains' or 'interest', whatever reason they bought into it, it wasn't based on any real understanding of the system, and more on the hype and scammers. Especially since even mainstream news knew that the price was artificially being inflated and would eventually crash as the responsible parties cashed out.

    1. Re:promises? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      They are talking about what they believed, not about what information was actually available. That is also why they claim to be victims. They are victims of their own cluelessness only, not in any other way.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  10. But it's not vaporware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The software exists, and it does what it's supposed to. That's the exact opposite of vaporware.

  11. They were successful speculations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most of these investments (really speculations) were quite successful. You're just supposed to consider them - like any speculation or investment - as part of your entire risk portfolio and rebalance out of them as they rise. If every quarter you'd been taking out half of any Bitcoin gains and putting it into whole-market index funds, why, you'd have had a dandy experience. The silly thing is, you can't do that with most highly speculative investments (many have low liquidity) but you can with most cryptocurrencies! So the problem here was not the speculation, but the speculators.

    1. Re:They were successful speculations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't say for the other cryptos, but even as early as the $50 BTC you could easily wait a week for a sell-order to process, during which time it wouldn't be uncommon for months worth of gain to be wiped out. It was gambling, simple as. Treat it like the nickel slots and you'll be fine.

  12. Stupidity is supposed to be painful by asackett · · Score: 5, Informative

    I kinda hate jumping onto the bandwagon, but investing in anything on the basis of "someone dumber than me will buy it for more than I paid" always leads to the greatest number of people learning the hard way that they're the dumber someones.

    Tuition can be wickedly expensive in the school of hard knocks.

    --

    Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    1. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are aware that is how the stockmarkets work, right? And I do mean the stock market, not shares themselves.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by asackett · · Score: 1

      Yes, I am. Stock markets also "experience corrections." Every three to seven years, on average.

      --

      Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    3. Re:Stupidity is supposed to be painful by jittles · · Score: 1

      Tuition can be wickedly expensive in the school of hard knocks.

      Speaking of tuition, I read somewhere that a lot of college kids were taking out cash advances on credit cards to try and make money off of bitcoin. To the point where credit card companies revised their cash advance policies to specifically forbid such a practice (not that they can stop it from a practical perspective). So there were a lot of dumb kids who probably already had crushing student loan debt who now have crushing credit card debt as well.

    4. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by swillden · · Score: 4, Informative

      but investing in anything on the basis of "someone dumber than me will buy it for more than I paid" always leads to the greatest number of people learning the hard way that they're the dumber someones.

      You are aware that is how the stockmarkets work, right?

      No, it is not.

      When you invest in stocks, you're buying a share of a (hopefully) productive company which is making and selling stuff, contributing to the economy and thereby generating profits for you. Some of those companies distribute your share of those profits in the form of dividends, others plow the profits into growth or stock repurchase plans, increasing the value of the shares you hold. Either way, you're buying a chunk of an enterprise you expect to be productive and therefore give you a positive return.

      Sure, stock markets have ups and downs, sometimes running values above their realistic levels, and then correcting back downward, but over time and over a broad enough portfolio of stocks, you can absolutely expect positive returns on your investment. Not because you can sell to people dumber than you, but because you're buying pieces of real, productive enterprises that generate real value.

      Cryptocurrencies are not the same. To the extent that cryptocurrencies are currencies, they're like "investing" in any other currency -- speculating on the relative strengths of different segments of the overall economy, which are wildly unpredictable and provide no engine of long-term predictable gains like that of healthy companies. Trading in "real" currencies takes two forms: arbitrage which attempts to profit from short-term changes and serves to provide liquidity for currency exchanges while smoothing out spurious differences, and hedging, which helps to limit the effects of currency swings on companies that trade in multiple currencies. No on "invests" in currencies by buying and holding (well, other than central banks, which do it for reasons other than generating profits), because there's no reason to believe that will work.

      The reason people have "invested" in cryptocurrencies is because they have not been behaving like currencies. But there's also no real growth engine behind them beyond pure speculation: buying on the basis that "someone dumber than me will buy it for more than I paid". There was one reason to expect the continual increase in cryptocurrency values: the fact that most of them (especially BTC) have a hard upper limit on the number of coins that can be created. But the problem with that "hard upper limit" is that there is no limit on the number of cryptocurrencies that can be created. Not only that, but they don't actually work well as currencies, for numerous reasons.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean, other than having something to back those stocks, right? What, pray tell, can you point to that backs BitCoin?

    6. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually stock markets don't work that way any more than any other market does. Stocks become more valuable for the same reason a tree that grows and produces more fruit becomes more valuable.

      There certainly is a "greater fool" aspect to any market where people speculate. People buy farmland on speculation But a farmer who buys farmland is basing the price on the value of the crops the land will produce, not finding a greater fool to pay more in the future. Ultimately even the price the speculator gets depends on that same thing, although there may be a "greater fool" who will pay them even more.

      The only real value of bitcoin is that it allows for anonymous transactions. Even that is marginal since bitcoin needs to be converted to another currency to be useful and the conversion is public. The other attribute it has is that there is a limit on its supply. But its clear that even the current supply of bitcoins far outstrips the current demand for its use. The number of transactions using bitcoin that aren't simply currency speculation is trivial. Which is why most bitcoins are almost entirely in the hands of speculators waiting either for a greater fool or for something to create greater demand for bitcoins' use.

    7. Re:Stupidity is supposed to be painful by hey! · · Score: 1

      Stupidity isn't the problem here. It's ignorance

      And why should these poor ignoramuses be anything but ignorant? Did the media warn them about the volatility of cryptocurrencies? Did their schools teach them how to manage risk in a balanced investment portfolio? Would you expect their life experience to equip them for defining "opportunity cost" or explaining dollar cost averaging?

      How are they supposed to even know they don't know enough to mess with this kind of shit?

      Here's the downside of saying, "Well, let them learn the hard way." The Internet has brought us to the brink of a new era of mass hysteria and popular delusion. Yes, the Internet gives us instant access to nuggets of information, but those nuggets are buried in a mountain of bullshit. This makes the masses easier to con than ever, and when they get burned they aren't going to be philosophical about it. They're going to demands action. Drastic action.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Stupidity is supposed to be painful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't this exactly what the entire California housing market is based on. I remember when I lived in the Valley locals were explaining to me that to live where you wanted you basically adopted a 20 year plan, started 30 miles away and moved every other year or so closer and closer. The whole "plan" was predicated on the fact that you would and could sell at a higher value than you bought and would move a few miles closer to the desired ending address.

    9. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      Crypto is like investing in a stock with an infinity price to earnings ratio.

    10. Re:Stupidity is supposed to be painful by asackett · · Score: 1

      I hadn't intended to imply "let them learn the hard way". I'm just amazed that no one ever told them what most who live in capitalist culture are told as children: "When something sounds too good to be true it probably is" and "Just because all of your friends are jumping off of a bridge doesn't mean that you should jump off of a bridge." Neither concept requires a degree in economics.

      --

      Warning: This signature may offend some viewers.

    11. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many people are investing in blockchain, of which currency is but one piece. At least try to acknowledge the entire space when you start throwing out bullshit.

    12. Re:Stupidity is supposed to be painful by hey! · · Score: 1

      The flip side of being a "capitalist culture" is being a consumer culture.

      In a the capitalist facet of our culture people make informed decisions about things like risk. On the consumer side of things the habit of irrational, emotional decision making is relentlessly promoted. These people are raised to be sheep for the slaughter.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    13. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by bws111 · · Score: 1

      How, exactly, does one 'invest in blockchain', other than by buying stock in companies doing blockchain stuff? If you think buying BTC (or any other crypocurrency) is 'investing in blockchain', you are an idiot.

    14. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a retard and have no idea what decentralized cryptocurrencies were created for, how they're used, valued, adopted into economies, etc.

      Get lost.

    15. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by swillden · · Score: 1

      Crypto is like investing in a stock with an infinity price to earnings ratio.

      You mean "Cryptocurrency is like..."

      "Crypto" is short for "cryptography" and has been for decades. Please help fight the redefinition.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by swillden · · Score: 1

      You're a retard and have no idea what decentralized cryptocurrencies were created for, how they're used, valued, adopted into economies, etc.

      I know exactly what they were created for, how they are (and are not) used in practice, how they are valued, how they have (and have not) been adopted into economies. Far better than you do, I (very strongly) suspect.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    17. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by swillden · · Score: 1

      Many people are investing in blockchain, of which currency is but one piece. At least try to acknowledge the entire space when you start throwing out bullshit.

      I said nothing about blockchain. I spoke only about current cryptocurrencies. Cryptocurrencies aren't necessarily blockchain-based (see Chaum's eCash for an early non-blockchain example), and blockchains aren't usable only for cryptocurrencies. They're really not that closely related. Also, buying cryptocurrencies does nothing to invest in the general concept of blockchains... or even to invest in the general notion of cryptocurrencies. When you buy BTC, you're buying BTC. No more, no less.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    18. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by houghi · · Score: 1

      Stocks are an invesatment. That is what yuu explained. The sockmarket is a place where you buy and sell anything. And the target is to sell for a higher price than what you bought it for.

      Please do not confuse the two. They are unrelated.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    19. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by swillden · · Score: 1

      Stocks are an invesatment. That is what you explained.

      You claimed that the stock markets work as investing "on the basis of someone dumber than me will buy it for more than I paid". Those were asackett's words about cryptocurrency investment, and you claimed that's how stock markets work. That claim is false.

      The stockmarket is a place where you buy and sell anything.

      No, it's a place where you buy and sell part ownership of publicly-traded companies.

      And the target is to sell for a higher price than what you bought it for.

      Not always. Sometimes the target is to buy a stock that will generate an ongoing dividend stream -- this is especially true of blue chips.

      But even if we ignore that and assume that the goal is always to buy low and sell high, that still doesn't support your claim that you're buying on the basis of "someone dumber than me will buy it for more than I paid". Non-dividend stocks increase in value not because people get dumber, but because the value of the stock actually increases, because the company makes and sells stuff, generating revenue which is invested in growth (or buybacks). So if you buy a stock now and sell it ten years from now you expect to get more money from it because the company is actually worth more, so your share of the company has increased in value. Not because you expect people ten years from now to be dumber.

      Please do not confuse the two. They are unrelated.

      I'm sorry, it's not clear to me what two things you're referring to.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    20. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Uh... Not always. You can make plenty of money selling stocks for less than was paid for them.. It's called shorting..

    21. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin wasn't designed to be anonymous. It was designed to be verifiable and traceable.. Those two things are almost in direct opposition to anonymous.

    22. Re: Stupidity is supposed to be painful by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      I liek u

  13. No, but look at the benefits by Trogre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not all bad.

    All these crypto-miners have fostered better GPUs, and have driven demand for more generating capacity in the power grid. And now that it's over, the rest of us can use these for useful purposes.

    So thank you, early adopters. Sorry that the inevitable happened to your wasted energy.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:No, but look at the benefits by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      and have driven demand for more generating capacity in the power grid.

      Yes by consuming the same energy as the industry, commercial and residential activities of a nation with 18million people at a time where emisisons and energy waste is considered critical, all the while bolstering the startup of decommissioned dirty power while the world is being screwed.

      This planet is fucked. I just hope Elon builds the rocket in time.

    2. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Hey! Cryptocurrency is a thing! Let's make our GPUs better because previously we were just going to stick to this revision of the hardware forever," said no GPU manufacturer ever.

      In fact GPU support for crypto is still very poor, with neither major manufacturer even providing hand-coded optimized miners for BTC and ETH, and no card capable of saturating the advertised RAM bandwidth when computing ETH. They've literally done no work on this stuff at all.

      Which was the right approach.

    3. Re:No, but look at the benefits by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure this has put more money into the pockets of AMD or Nvidia, instead just about about all of the money seems to have gone into the pockets of AIB board partners, wholesalers and consumer facing retailers. Companies who make highly complex computer hardware like GPUs tend to not make much more than exactly what they think they can sell due to months long lead times and the cost of over-producing. The high end semiconductor industry has absolutely gone in for so-called lean manufacturing in the last few years.

      Judging by how bad the drought was between June last year and March this year it's pretty clear that neither AMD nor Nvidia increased their production by all that much. This goes particularly for AMD considering this summer only Nvidia found themselves delaying a product launch due to unsold inventory.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    4. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect you're just being flip, but to be clear: there is zero probability that any planet except Earth can sustain a human population of sufficient size to allow multi-generation (oh, say 10+) species survival. In other words here is the only place any of us will ever will call hoime (unless and until scientifically revolutionary energy technology is created). Rather than the futile hope in greener pastures, spend some effort, time, & energy making here better and more sustainable.

    5. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mars secured.
                - Your friend elon

    6. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This planet is fucked. I just hope Elon builds the rocket in time.

      At least that way we get to experience the joy as we shoot some really annoying people into the sun.

    7. Re:No, but look at the benefits by supremebob · · Score: 1

      I don't really think it fostered better GPU's, but it certainly drove up the prices for the existing supply of them. We got to the point where they were basically sold out everywhere, and miners were paying $500 for $250 video cards on eBay earlier this year.

      I guess that's good for AMD and Nvidia shareholders, as they had no trouble selling every video card they made in 2017 and early 2018. Selling the picks and shovels is always a profitable business to be in during a gold rush.

    8. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Yep. All they achieved was making sure ordinary people couldn't buy a decent bang-per-buck graphics card for a year or so.

      --
      No sig today...
    9. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Yes and no.

      GPU manufacturers have not provided miner-specific optimizations, but that hasn't stopped people buying their high-end GPUs specifically for mining.

      Which drives up demand for high-end GPUs, which were previously only of interest to gamers and niche compute centers.

      Which drives up the R&D budget for that sector and shifts tier priorities and in turn refresh launch dates.

      I assume you've never worked with decision-makers at tech companies?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    10. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Yes by consuming the same energy as the industry, commercial and residential activities of a nation with 18million people at a time where emisisons and energy waste is considered critical, all the while bolstering the startup of decommissioned dirty power while the world is being screwed.

      Precisely. Cryptomining has been a massive negative for humanity overall, and another reflection of people's insatiable greed. I merely pointed out a couple of silver linings - investing in power generation not all of which is dirty being one of them.

      This planet is fucked. I just hope Elon builds the rocket in time.

      And go where, exactly? There is literally nowhere in the reachable universe that is anywhere near as compatible with human life as what Earth would be even in a worst-case climate change scenario.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    11. Re:No, but look at the benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one can build any rocket that can take a significant number of people off this planet. This is simply not doable with rocket technology, do the math. It amazes me that otherwise educated people fall for this pipe-dream.

      This great planet is the only one we have, and likely will ever have. If we doom it, so are we.

    12. Re:No, but look at the benefits by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Yes we can.. You don't build the rocket on the ground. You build it in orbit, in pieces. it would be gargantuanly expensive and would probably take a long time to do it, but we certainly have the ability to do it.

      Now, where you would point it, that's another story...

      Nobody has the technology to lift anything as large as the ISS to orbit, yet it's there.... You build in pieces....

  14. Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "It will pay dividends."

    Why do you think people still use that phrase for anything that will reward you in the future? "Spend your youth living healthfully, and it will pay dividends to your future happiness." That phrase is part of the idiomatic vernacular, because the only reason to buy was at one time to get in on that sweet, sweet cut of the real profits, known as dividends.

    Of course, just like robbers broke into banks "Because that's where the money is", so too did the federal government begin ransacking dividends for tax monies; dividends are taxed higher than capital gains. The result has been obvious: A shift away from investment in dividends; people now invest in capital gains (and, often, that's all even well established companies offer), and thus the Greater Fool Theory has become the foundation of the entire U.S. stock market—the only alternative mechanisms for actually making money are relatively complex schemes for gambling, such as stock options, which are too difficult and dangerous for the average person.

    1. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Uh, dividends are taxed identically to short-term capital gains... that's what they ARE.

      I'll leave it to google to explain to you the many reasons it's a good idea to tax long-term capital gains at a slightly lower rate.

    2. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Greater Fool has been in practice long before the stock market and has been part of the stock market from its very beginning. It's your idiotic "it's the government's fault" thinking that leads to so many making the most basic investment mistakes like the two noted (all eggs in one basket).

      Just to set the record straight, taxes in the US are geared toward long term investing and savings for retirement. It would be nice if it was also geared toward saving for higher education & primary residence ownership, but those parts have been all messed up for a while thanks to both parties.

    3. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Just to set the record straight, taxes in the US are geared toward long term investing and savings for retirement.

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha wow that's so stupid!!

      Unicorn and rainbow, I kan haz?!??

    4. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by jonesy16 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, short term capital gains and unqualified dividends are taxed at ordinary income rates. Long term capital gains (stocks held longer than 1 year) and qualified dividends (stocks held for more than 60 days in a 121 day window around the dividend distribution) are taxed at preferential rates, as low as 0% depending on your income bracket but at 15% for a good portion of the population.

      https://finance.yahoo.com/news...

    5. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by n0nsensical · · Score: 1

      Leave it to an AC on Slashdot to 'correct' someone with 'alternative facts'

    6. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by n0nsensical · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up if I had mod points but it seems they're past their expiration date

    7. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      I'll leave it to google to explain to you the many reasons it's a good idea to tax long-term capital gains at a slightly lower rate.

      Because the investor class wants that?

      Warren Buffet has argued extensively that taxing long term capital gains for people making billions of dollars is wrong. Why should Warren be taxed at a lower rate than his secretary? We need to have a more graduated long term capital gain tax.

    8. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "savings for retirement"

      How the fuck are you supposed to do that with interest rates effectively at 0%? It IS the governments fault, forcing people into the market. When all you want to do is save but you are forced into riskier investments due to lack of return, 'xCoin' can start looking reasonable to some.

    9. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by magzteel · · Score: 1

      "savings for retirement"

      How the fuck are you supposed to do that with interest rates effectively at 0%? It IS the governments fault, forcing people into the market. When all you want to do is save but you are forced into riskier investments due to lack of return, 'xCoin' can start looking reasonable to some.

      Saving and investing aren't the same thing.

      Nobody is forced to invest. Investing involves putting capital at risk.
      Low risk generally means no or low return, but your capital is probably safe.
      High risk could have high return or you could lose it all.

      These people perceived cryptocoins as a low risk investment with a very high return.
      Obviously they were very wrong.

    10. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by CGordy · · Score: 1

      The "greater fool" theory isn't quite applicable because companies buy back their shares on market to return cash instead of paying dividends.

    11. Re: Interestingly, taxation shifted stocks to GFT by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Taxes have to be low AND interest rates have to be high to outstrip the gains of the stock market, even in a utopia without graft and crony capitalism. Socking money away is not and never will be "saving" unless taxes are nearly non-existant as they were in the past.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  15. Buying Opportunity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm fairly averse to bitcoin for all the reasons previously expressed n /.; though I can't help but wonder if this is a good buying opportunity while the price is 'low'... Time will tell I suppose.

    1. Re:Buying Opportunity? by gavron · · Score: 1

      The price is low because bitcoing has no value. Have you not read the 49 comments above yours? Do you not "get it"?

      If you're thinking of getting in because the price is lower you're the greatEST fool of the GTF.

      E

    2. Re:Buying Opportunity? by gravewax · · Score: 1

      Buying opportunities are when prices are artificially low, Prices aren't low they are actually still quite high for the value as a lot of these badly burnt gamblers exit the market as the debts they incurred take their toll, the prices will likely continue to settle as those people exit and are unlikely to return. It will also scare off a lot of other suckers.

    3. Re:Buying Opportunity? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly averse to bitcoin for all the reasons previously expressed n /.; though I can't help but wonder if this is a good buying opportunity while the price is 'low'... Time will tell I suppose.

      I was reading an article this morning that the price has spiked again.

      Only a matter before it falls again too. It's a gamble with more risks than just going up and down. You can lose money due to a technicality or to theft; but there is money to be made- it's just high risk.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  16. Ordinary, hard working? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I thought that cryptocurrencies would be the one and only breakthrough for ordinary hardworking people like us,"

    And yet you were throwing debt at what was essentially a "get rich quick" scheme? That's not ordinary nor hardworking, that's just idiocy.

    1. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you wouldn't call it a get rich quick scheme because many of the coins do attempt to genuinely revolutionize the banking system. you'd call it a technology that failed.
      or a technology that is yet to succeed.

      A get rich quick scheme is something that has no intention of doing anything other than making people rich.

    2. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A get rich quick scheme is something that has no intention of doing anything other than making people rich.

      And yet, that's exactly how people treated it from the start of 2018.

    3. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      And yet you were throwing debt at what was essentially a "get rich quick" scheme? That's not ordinary nor hardworking, that's just idiocy.

      It's an ordinary - as in, nobody of significance - hard working guy thinking a Nigerian prince will give him millions and millions of dollars. You'd be surprised how many people suddenly go off on a tangent and think this is it, I've struck gold when in reality they're the scam victim or they're the fall guy in some money laundering / drug smuggling / pyramid scheme. I mean one thing is whether or not crypto-currencies have a market, another thing is to believe this is like free money for everybody. After the dotcom boom comes the dotcom bust, he could have easily lost just that much on blind faith in the stock market.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      Way to punch down and berate the little people for the crime of thinking they could use financial schemes to their advantage like the ruling class does. Stay in your places and don't get uppity, peasants, right?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    5. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      With maybe the difference that gold, platinum, silver and the rest of the non-ferrous metals actually do have a value due to them actually having some useful application.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, know what you're doing instead of jumping a bandwagon you don't even remotely understand the mechanics behind.

      I want to get rich like a CEO, so I go and create a business without knowing the first thing about running one. Then, after the inevitable crash, I come crying why I can't use the markets to my advantage like Musk and Bezos and that the bad ruling class wants to keep me down and it totally isn't my fault.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The whole concept of "investing" (stocks, real estate, even home ownership),where people get $$$ for practically DOING NOTHING is completely astonishing to me. You want $? Get off your ass and work for it. Talk about entitled and believing in false promises...

    8. Re: Ordinary, hard working? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Useful application being 10% of the total mined...

    9. Re: Ordinary, hard working? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's approximately 10% more than what you have with Bitcoins.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      You're still punching down. How is it that people like you went from practically worshipping the working class to outright despising them? What happened? For the workers, remember?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    11. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, I'm very much for a sensible work-reward balance, but what we have here is nothing short of greed. Someone saw a get-rich-quick scheme and wanted in. With all due respect, that's not "empowering the working people", that's just someone who saw some greedy bastard getting rich and wanted to get rich himself, and didn't give a shit about "the working people" and all that.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by gordguide · · Score: 1

      you wouldn't call it a get rich quick scheme because many of the coins do attempt to genuinely revolutionize the banking system. you'd call it a technology that failed.
      or a technology that is yet to succeed.

      A get rich quick scheme is something that has no intention of doing anything other than making people rich.

      Cryptocurrencies have zero potential to "revolutionize the banking system" because Banks are the only mechanism to create debt, and bank debt creates money out of thin air. Bitcoin, et al, are specifically crafted to never create money out of thin air once created, and can only create money by introducing a new currency, which doesn't really work (it's no different than creating a new publicly traded stock ... it simply converts conventional currency into another speculative form) thus the money supply can never grow in a world without conventional banks. To "revolutionize" the banking system by a switch to a cryptocurrency would be to doom said economy into recession.

    13. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by gordguide · · Score: 1

      Way to punch down and berate the little people for the crime of thinking they could use financial schemes to their advantage like the ruling class does. Stay in your places and don't get uppity, peasants, right?

      The "Little People" can use each and every investment strategy the "ruling class" does. Even with $20 a month you can buy Apple, Alphabet, or any stock regardless of it's share value with investment brokers who buy pooled fractional shares on behalf of their clients.

      You can purchase mortgages at that same rate (or whatever you can afford), purchase gold coins or physical ounces or fractions of ounces of gold and hoard them under the kitchen floorboards. You can even own the mortgage on your own home once your equity and your investment pool become equal, and pay mortgage interest to yourself.

      The "Little People" who fail to educate themselves are the ones whom the "ruling class" will outclass when it comes to investments. So, the path is clear ...

    14. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Since "ordinary" people are pretty clueless about how things actually work, it does fit right in.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    15. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      That is not it. The message here is "only do investments that you actually understand" and "only gamble with money you can afford to lose" and it is good advice.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    16. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you won't be crying if your daddy's corporation bails you out. That's what makes them the ruling class. Then you can go on to be POTUS, like W!

      Just consequences don't always fall where you'd think they're supposed to.

    17. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      My issue with this isn't that you care about the working class, it's that you blame anyone but the workers who bought into something they did not understand. You lefties have abandoned ALL personal responsibility. No matter what happens, it is ALWAYS someone else's fault. Somehow the "man" is behind everything, fucking with everyone.

      Why don't you chide people who tossed thousands of dollars at something they had absolutely no knowledge of?

      I went to public school.. I learned about the tulips.. I learned basic math.. I learned that when something sounds to good to be true... I also learned (from my very conservative parents) that my actions were my responsibility. My Dad didn't take kindly to blaming others for my poor decisions.

      I've watched the cryptocurrencies with a fair amount of amusement..I've seen a few people make a little money and a few people lose a little money.. But not a single one of them really understood ANYTHING about bitcoin. It was simply a word to throw money at and hope it paid off. To those I knew, who played the bitcoin game, it was gambling..

      GAMBLING. End of story..

    18. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      I swear to God I've read this exact same comment falsely accusing me of being a Leftist before.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    19. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      There's an old saying... If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...

      Your post accuses the GP of punching down and thinking of the working class as peasants. He never said anything of the sort.. He just said that to use debt as an investment instrument was idiocy. That is a factual statement. If you use debt to invest, you risk not only losing your investment but having an equal amount of debt if the investment sours. You are doubling your risk. That is IDIOCY.

      For all we know, the GP is working class as well. But he implied that the person making the investment was personally responsible for their situation and you attacked him for it.

      Abandonment of personal responsibility is a hallmark of the left. They blame everyone else.. It's always some else's fault...

      I propose that you may not think you are on the left, but you are, in fact, on the left. This whole concept of "I identify as...." is immoral, deceptive, and delusional. So, you may identify as a centrist or a conservative, but your actions seem to contradict that. A person may identify as a female, dress as a female, talk like a female.. But if they're packing a dick, that person is a male.. Every cell in their body is male. To disregard their statement that they are female is not an attack on them, it's acceptance of reality. To support their claim is to abandon reality and accept fantasy. Your statements mark you as leftist. I will not abandon reality.

    20. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      With 20 dollars you can NOT simply invest like a tiny rich man. If you work hard you can kind of sort of invest like a rich person.
      I do concede that most of the little people don't educate themselves as much as they should but there are RICH people actively doing everything they can to keep these little fuckers as confused as possible.

      Look here, a bunch of guys who presumably know math and science, probably have nice degrees, probably lots of reasonably wealthy people. Look in this thread and see all the people talking about what a good investment gold is. Someone told them that, they read it somewhere.
      It might seem dumb to you but somewhere along the line you managed to get a few kernels of good solid financial knowledge that were good enough that you could use them to screen out the bullshit and determine who and what you should be listening to for further advice.

    21. Re:Ordinary, hard working? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Dude uh...you're really out in left field now. I don't know where you've been reading, but it's time to get back to the rest of us. Especially when you claim loudly you're in reality. If you have to say it, you're probably not, yaknow?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  17. I am curious... by PseudoThink · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How does the currently bearish press resemble (or not) that after the previous Bitcoin bubble, or the one before that? Also, to those who enjoy citing tulip mania, how many bubbles did tulip mania go through before it crashed, and what as the approximate peak market cap of each bubble?

    1. Re:I am curious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have the most intelligent question here. Bravo.

    2. Re: I am curious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be clear, that answer wouldn't tell us anything useful about where Bitcoin's price is going, or if cryptocurrencies are a good gamble or not.

    3. Re:I am curious... by smi.james.th · · Score: 2

      Some analyses of the size of the bubble have been performed:

      https://www.moneyweb.co.za/news-fast-news/bitcoin-the-biggest-bubble-in-history-is-popping/

      I'm not aware of any comparisons of the nature of the press surrounding it though. That is quite an interesting question.

      --
      One thing I know, and that is that I am ignorant...
    4. Re: I am curious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Few cryptocurrencies ARE a good gamble, some WERE a good gamble and most WILL NOT be a good gamble. Hope that helps your curiosity.

    5. Re:I am curious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin is an experiment to beat the hype bubble/burst panic cycle. Decreased production combined with slower transaction times will artificially hold the valuation of bitcoin at higher levels than it should have. It may retain enough value to allow the panic to calm down, and thus keep people interested long enough to form a new bubble.

      Fortunately, the banks have made it more difficult to buy crypto currency, because if these Bitcoin bubbles continue they could seriously destabilize world economies. And the way Bitcoin has been designed, there is still the possibility that Bitcoin could rebound with an even bigger bubble, and it could keep going until enough money has been gambled away, or enough people get burned bad enough to kill the Bitcoin market. Bitcoin is a game of Hot Potato, or "musical chairs" with the world's money, and it is truly the ultimate "greater fool" business model.

      My prediction is that this is the end of Bitcoin, meaning that it is the biggest bubble Bitcoin or any crypto currency will ever see.

    6. Re:I am curious... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      You have the most intelligent question here. Bravo.

      Rubbish. Tulips take effort to grow them. Bitcoin doesn't.

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:I am curious... by James+Carnley · · Score: 1

      It takes a hell of a lot more work to create a Bitcoin than to grow a tulip.

    8. Re:I am curious... by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      How does the currently bearish press resemble (or not) that after the previous Bitcoin bubble, or the one before that? Also, to those who enjoy citing tulip mania, how many bubbles did tulip mania go through before it crashed, and what as the approximate peak market cap of each bubble?

      How are any of these questions relevant. Specifically,
        * How do you think that the number of tulip bubbles will predict the number of Bitcoin bubbles?
        * How do you think you have the skills to time the bottom and top of each bubble so as to capture any of that market cap rather than watch your stake dissipate because you bought and/or sold too late?

      And the final and best one, if you can time the market and/or individual assets, then when why do you need to use Bitcoin to do it?

  18. Bitcoin has real problems. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Transaction times and transaction fees are awful and not at all competitive with credit (let alone cash), and there is no clear way to address either problem. In fact, it looks like both problems will only get worse as bitcoin becomes more popular. Until both problems are solved, bitcoin is worthless as a currency because it can't be used like other currencies can.

    1. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by reanjr · · Score: 1, Troll

      FUD.

      Transaction times are faster than ACH or credit transfer and fees are laughably low. You can even send without a fee, but it might take a bit longer then.

    2. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      This just is not true at all. You can send without a fee, in which case your transaction will never be processed. Therefore actually, you can't. Here in NZ, I can transfer between banks essentially instantly and it costs nothing. I'm not sure how Bitcoin is cheaper or faster.

    3. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      complete and utter BULLSHIT. For bitcoin fees are incredibly expensive, especially with large transaction size. You can transfer through a bank or money exchange many times cheaper and faster than bitcoin during peak periods. I tried a relatively low transaction fee for my last (I do mean LAST) transaction some months back. Took 8 Days and cost me nearly 10% due to the transaction size, that is just fucking insane.

    4. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were you paying those fees to an exchange perhaps or in bitcoins using a direct client? Exchange rates fluctuate bit exchange fees are not the same as transaction rates.

    5. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Bullshit. I have my gas company ACH a payment when I haven't gotten it in the mail adequately. I speak to them on the phone to do it. It takes seconds.

    6. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Interbank-transfers are actually massively cheaper than bitcoin transfers and have assured low execution times. For example, a SEPA transfer of unlimited (!) volume costs around 25 cent for the end-customer.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by reanjr · · Score: 1

      No. It takes seconds for them to trust that it will get sent in the future. This is equivalent to a transaction appearing on the BTC network, which usually takes less than a second. The money doesn't actually get transferred over ACH until later settlement. In BTC, this settlement takes 20-60 minutes. With ACH, it's typically a full day; sometimes more, depending on the relationehips between banks. Try sending an ACH to Malysia and see how long it takes when the banks don't actually trust one another.

    8. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by reanjr · · Score: 1

      So, you don't actually use BTC or know how it works...

    9. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by reanjr · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people send BTC without fees, and unless there is some kind of unusual event going on, these transactions do get picked up and confirmed. The default software used for mining does not reject transactions without fees. As long as the demand for the network is below capacity, no one has any problem using BTC without fees.

    10. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by reanjr · · Score: 1

      SEPA instant transfers (not traditional SEPA) are faster than BTC, but were only introduced last year and are not available in most countries.

      And you can send BTC for much less than 25 cents.

    11. Re: Bitcoin has real problems. by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

      If people were using bitcoin properly as a means of payment then bitcoin would be awesome, stable price, low cost for online transactions. It's the investors, hype men, and speculators that have ironically turned bitcoin into an idiots investment,

  19. I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    in the last 47 years of my life. It always comes down to this. once the mass media hype starts and ordinary people are dragged into the next financial get rich quick scheme in the masses, it is better to get out if you are into something.
    The pattern is usually that you get lots of press reports, that you should invest, that this thing is a totally new economy which works differently, that you are stupid if you do not invest. Once those reports crawl up, you can expect a crash between the next three months and a year.
    I have seen this with the dot bomb bust, with the housing bubble etc... and the patterns 1929 were exactly the same, when Kennedy went out of the stock market 1928 because he got stock advices from people working on the street.
    Also the bomb cycle always is the same, it starts to go down, the financial press and others are screaming hold... then it recovers slightly everyone is yelling it just was a hickup and then it goes down again everyone screams you have to hold and then over and over again with a few upwards pumps along the road. The people screaming hold, usually are the ones connected to the big investors selling big time to get out while everyone thinks they can recover.

    1. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, which makes the post directly after yours so hilarious!

    2. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Why does one of the best analysis of the whole mess come from an AC? You have a faint idea how many are actually going to read this now? Log in next time!

      Because this is spot on. The hallmark of a bubble-bust is usually when mass media reporting starts dragging in the uninformed who think they could get a share of the cake. From then on, it's a cycle of greed, fear and greed until the inevitable bubble-popping.

      I dare say that you can even go so far as to kill any market that way, simply by hyping it in the press, getting uninformed people to invest in it, inflate it past any sane levels and when the main investors exit simply because they know that the market cannot deliver at the level it has been inflated to, the panic sales set in and you can see the market crumble, crash and burn. Even if it would have been a healthy one if it had been allowed to grow slowly and steadily.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously you have no been paying any attention to the crypto markets. It's gone through corrections before, and THIS correction has an underlying cause that (curiously) nobody has mentioned.

      Do you know anything about the CFTC? Why did they subpoena Bitfinex and Tether Ltd.?

      Do your homework, jeez.

    4. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Registering and logging in only allows other users to ban you when they don't like what you have to say. This is how it works at slashdot, regardless of what whiplash says.

      It is always better to post AC.

    5. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Registering and logging in only allows other users to ban you when they don't like what you have to say.

      Users cannot ban you. They can only foe you, so that they don't see your comments as often. Or they can downmod you because they don't like your name. I often get posts in other discussions modded down when I poke the Trumpanzees. They'll mod down the comment they don't like, and then four more random comments just to teach me a lesson. Then I get some upmods, their effort is wasted, and I continue.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Rolgar · · Score: 1

      The 1929 bubble and crash was caused in large part by people buying on margin because they could invest a small amount, and they would be loaned more, which would increase their ability to buy, but which also made prices increase (because their was more money buying the same (approximate) number of stocks. Well, when losses start, the brokerage can't and won't take the loss for the people who's money they hold (most of what they have is other people's money, and I wouldn't want my broker to take my funds to keep somebody else's account afloat because if the market doesn't recover, my funds are lost even if I'm in cash), so they are forced to sell (liquidate) to pay off the debt. These sales push prices down further, which triggers more margin calls, and then all of the increases due to debt in the system push the prices down to some low that destroys fortunes built on debt. Eventually, the wealthy who didn't play the game and possibly sold when assets were overpriced buy at cycle lows, and make a huge profit in the next recovery (Trump mentioned doing this). Returns from current stock market evaluations historically lead to negative or flat returns for the next decade. If you buy toward the bottom of the next crash, you will be set for great returns because you will have bought future dividends and growth at a huge discount compared to today's prices, plus you will have not suffered through the loses, and won't have to make them up to get back the losses from the highs. Of course, if you know how to time the market, you should stay in until the next crash starts, then sell. An easy system is selling when the market goes below the 50 day moving average. I see a lot of experts I trust expecting the fallout to start next year, but it could easily take several years more. Of course, Turkey, Spain, Italy, and others that are over leveraged and with no market power could spark a collapse that takes down the major banks like the Swiss, German, US, and British powerhouses, which by virtue of their size would lead to a cascading collapse of the debt system that may be too big to fix this next time around because of the size of the numbers.

      Got a call about a home refinance last week from somebody at one of the largest mortgage lenders in the country. The sales man on the phone was telling me how many at his company are taking out their home equity to invest in the market. I'm shaking my head, because that's just stupid. A huge part of the problem are that this economy is built heavily on debt (government, business and consumer) which are all at record levels, several times higher than the level that caused the crisis of a decade ago.

      Realize that housing, corporate stock prices via stock buybacks, government debt, consumer debt, student loans, pension obligations, social security, medicare and on and on are valued at hundreds of trillions of unfunded obligations for the next 2 or 3 generations. This cannot be sustained. Eventually it will all collapse because there will be insufficient payers to support the number of takers (unless the robot revolution makes such a surplus of everything that the cost of living goes down to nearly nothing, unfortunately, necessities are harder to make free than digital goods).

      When this collapse happens, there will be insufficient property values and stock market values to support the current interest payments, other spending, and the governments will have to act like Greece a decade ago, except their will be nobody else to provide a bailout because everybody will be dwarfed by the size of the mountain of debt.

      Eventually, the governments (ours and the rest of the top 20 nations) will be forced into a decision to honor these debts or to default through inflation. Honoring the debt will require the young (who aren't to blame for the problem which has been built over decades when they weren't alive or were minors) to pay a higher tax burden to benefit those who have little or nothing. If the governments choose to default instead, then we'll have a rapid rise in prices (see

    7. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does one of the best analysis of the whole mess come from an AC? You have a faint idea how many are actually going to read this now? Log in next time!

      Posting as AC didn't stop his post from getting +4. Usernames are overrated here.

    8. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly friend and foe are pretty silly anyways. I use them but don't assign any modifiers to either and I don't go out of my way to mod either over others.

      I use friends to keep track of people that say things I'd say are interesting or insightful. The hope is that I'd see their comments in other areas and if I disagreed, I'd give their posts more thought.

      Foe is largely for posters I think say a lot of really dumb shit, generally from politics threads but I also tag related to other topics. Mostly it's a heads up to keep some posts from getting under my skin when I see who it's from. Works pretty well for me.

    9. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does one of the best analysis of the whole mess come from an AC? You have a faint idea how many are actually going to read this now? Log in next time!

      The learned among us know the value of words do not come from who says them.

      The wise among us avoid the corrupting factor of praise more easily gained by rhetoric than ability.

      I will not be logging in next time. If you wish to read "the best analysis" again, judge on merit and not on name.

    10. Re:I have seen too many of those patterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO.
      They're screaming hold because like radio tv internet and phones,
      science based medical xrays rockets supply chains etc...
      They all know that decentralized cryptocurrency is not only
      here to stay, but will be HUGE and affect everything to come.
      Just like invention of the radio and printing press.

      They're screaming HOLD, because regarding
      decentralized cryptocurrency as an entire concept,
      THEY'RE TRYING TO HELP YOU.

      Unfortunately, yes, HOLD, isn't a proper sit down education they should be giving you,
      but you're supposed to DO YOUR OWN EDUCATION in this new world.

  20. Failing economics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea that something with N units (shares/coins) is worth N times the price the stupidest person is willing to pay for one unit is ridiculous.

    Bitcoin never had a value of 600 billion dollars. I doubt there was ever 100 Million in play, in actual cash in play. If you tried to sell all existing bitcoins, the price would crash below the total value of the cash put in.

    1. Re:Failing economics by etash · · Score: 1

      Totally agreed about market cap. You're not right about the amount that was into crypto though. The major exchanges only made 4 billion in 2017 from fees alone. there was definitely much more "invested" though from the average joe.

    2. Re:Failing economics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your basic supposition is correct, but your doubts are misleading. During the peak in January, I think total market liquidity for all crypto is estimated to have been around $6-$10 billion?

  21. Bitcoin is UP over 5% the last 24 hours. by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    Don't believe short sellers FUD.

    1. Re:Bitcoin is UP over 5% the last 24 hours. by Mjlner · · Score: 1

      Don't believe short sellers FUD.

      And global warming is hoax because it's colder today than yesterday. Don't believe the alarmists.

      --
      Lemon curry???
    2. Re:Bitcoin is UP over 5% the last 24 hours. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you even know what a short seller is? This story is about the enormous losses in cryptocurrencies over the last eight months.

    3. Re: Bitcoin is UP over 5% the last 24 hours. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Climate change, not global warming. Get with the 90s dude! Anyway, both are human induced phenomena, one directly amplifying the other!

    4. Re:Bitcoin is UP over 5% the last 24 hours. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You won't believe it, but on the other side of the planet, there even is winter right now.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  22. Cryptocurrency doesn't work by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1, Troll

    Not when it's easy for almost any company to create a new currency. There are more cryptocurrencies than there are real currencies.

    If gold-standard libertarians were worried about governments printing money - well now we have your paradise where governments aren't in control of most forms of currency. Taking into account the ICO scams, how's your regulation free paradise working out now?

    --
    Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    1. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1, Funny

      So you just decided to throw in a libertarian strawman for no reason? Who was arguing that, grandpa? Show us on the doll where the libertarian touched you.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can create a new crypto token, but you can't create support for it out of thin air.

      Older blockchains have thousands upon thousands of participants in the verification process. It takes time to build support for a new blockchain. Your new coin is worthless if you can't get anyone to support the underlying blockchain.

    3. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      Then explain why there are now more cryptocurrencies than countries.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    4. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      Your downvotes just prove me right about libertarians.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    5. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone can create a new cryptocurrency but as the parent said, without any support from users your new cryptocurrency will not be worth much of anything.

    6. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      It's more about how nobody was talking about libertarians at all, and then you just came out of nowhere and started railing against them, Grandpa. It's like how my own Grandpa would start ranting about Jews, apropos of nothing. Is it naptime already? Those libertarians won't hurt you while you're taking your nap. Did you forget to take your pills?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    7. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Your logic is flawed. Because "some" Libertarians say something, doesn't mean "most" believe that same thing. Unless you've done a comprehensive poll.....

      Using your logic, members of NAMBLA tend to be liberal.... So, even if you, personally, don't support child rape, your fellow liberals do..Just because you close your eyes and ears to your fellow Liberals doesn't mean people, like me, aren't subjected to hearing from the wide range of Liberals their hare-brained ideas all the time. Maybe next time, look around and see what your libtard friends really say.

    8. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      One person could, given enough time, create many thousands of cryptocurrencies, all by themselves. There is nothing that prevents anyone from creating any number of things. We could create a, practically, unlimited number of nations. Well, we probably couldn't go past 6 billion or we'd run out of heads-of-state.

      I could also, quite legally, mint my own coins out of whatever metal I so chose. As long as I don't call them dollars, I'm in the clear.. I could make coins for any unlimited number of imaginary nations...

      Your statement about cryptocurrencies outnumbering nations, is of no practical value, other than an attempt to scare the reader into thinking there is something inherently wrong with cryptocurrencies outnumbering sovereign nations.

      But, alas, the two are not related. You might think they are, but you are wrong. Part of that wrongness stems from your ignorance as to how cryptocurrencies actually work (or don't work, depending on your view).

      By the way, one of the reasons your statement regarding ratio of cryptocurrencies to number of nations is invalid to begin, is that some nations have no currency. Some nations have more than one currency. Nations are not required to have, nor prohibited from having, any number of monies. Thus, the number of nations can have no bearing on what is to be considered a proper number of currencies. It can only be arbitrary and based upon what the viewer believes.

      Now, fuck off :)

    9. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      No, you fuck off. You completely missed the point.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    10. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

      Stop getting so triggered.

      --
      Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
    11. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Is that the straw-man de jure? If someone responds to a statement, they are triggered? You know it's a comment section, right? I mean.. comments are kind of expected.

      Is the widdle liberal upset?

    12. Re:Cryptocurrency doesn't work by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      No... You missed the point, but that's to be expected.

  23. Woot! Cheap GPUs again by Ranger · · Score: 2

    Well, more reasonable prices anyway. I built my first PC from scratch last year, rather assembled. When I shopped for graphics cards I could not find what I wanted at a decent price thanks to the cryptocurrency miners. I ended up after much searching online buying a decent next lower tier graphics card at a good price. The card wasn't what I wanted but good enough.

    At the rate the miners were going they were actually putting out as much carbon dioxide as a small country, not good. Let's hope for our sakes that crypto currencies won't created another bubble for our wallet's sake and our environment's.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
    1. Re:Woot! Cheap GPUs again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we're still paying above MSRP for graphics cards despite all the talk and reports the last couple months about the fall of crypto.

    2. Re:Woot! Cheap GPUs again by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 1

      If you're still paying above MSRP you're obviously not looking very hard. I upgraded my GPU to a 1070 Ti at the start of the year when the bubble was still going, but by paying attention I was still able to get mine at MSRP.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    3. Re:Woot! Cheap GPUs again by johnsie · · Score: 1

      Mass produced machines are tested properly. I stick with those.

    4. Re: Woot! Cheap GPUs again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you have a crummy machine infested with crapware and shovelware

    5. Re:Woot! Cheap GPUs again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that the MSRP is already inflated. Don't believe me? Just look how much a GTX 570 used to cost. Ajust for inflation if it helps you to feel better..

    6. Re:Woot! Cheap GPUs again by Ranger · · Score: 1

      The thing is cards used to sell below MSRP and it took a while to find one at MSRP. I ended up with a GTX 1050, but I really wanted a GTX 1050 Ti and couldn't find one for MSRP. I'm happy with the card I ended up with. It does what I need to do.

      --
      "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  24. Elon? by Jzanu · · Score: 1

    Don't believe short sellers FUD.

    Didn't your doctor say you need to get more sleep?

    1. Re:Elon? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Who can sleep with most of his house's mortgage invested in bitcoins?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  25. No value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Currently, it's more than six thousand USD for one whole coin.

    1. Re:No value? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The value of a commodity is what someone else is willing to pay for it.

      Are you willing to pay 6 grand for a bitcoin? If not, why do you think someone else is?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:No value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or 1 million satoshi's

  26. bubble by matushorvath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whenever taxi drivers start giving you investment tips, it's a bubble.

    1. Re:bubble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends who they've been taxying... Always keep a keen ear for those taxis who operate near wall street, you may get insider info every once in a while.

    2. Re:bubble by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they call this the shoeshine boy indicator.
      My barber was excited about bitcoin when it was at 17k

    3. Re:bubble by Guybrush_T · · Score: 1

      Actually, at the peak of the bitcoin bubble, a taxi driver in LA asked me whether he should invest in bitcoin (when I told him I was in tech). I was so surprised by that question ... but then I realized how frustrating it is to realize you missed a bubble and could have gotten rich easily while you're struggling to make money every day.

      Anyway, I told him that there is some genuine need for crypto-currency but it is an extremely risky investment and the value peaking looked like a bubble (not reflecting the normal growth due to the need for crypto currencies).

      I don't know if he repeated that advice to other customers :-D

  27. "The Man" was selling in February by ayesnymous · · Score: 2

    Coincidentally that was when Wall Street approved and began Bitcoin futures trading.

    1. Re:"The Man" was selling in February by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...except that futures trading began in December.

  28. Suffering Immensely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I feel bad for the first family, but the second guy, who basically lost no money, what a joke.

    I lost $5000 in the stock market, and no one felt bad for me, and I wouldn't want anyone too.

    It's too bad we lose our focus on a drama queen.

  29. Well, there are two functions of a currency. by Mr.+Dollar+Ton · · Score: 1

    One is a transaction medium. The other is store of value.

    They are very distinct.

    A currency, crypto or otherwise is a good transaction medium if, well, it lowers the cost of transactions. It need not be very stable in the long run, as long as it is convenient to use for a payment and be converted to something else at a rate that the holder accepts. Some crypto currencies satisfy the requirements for this category quite well.

    But none of the crypto currencies satisfy the most important requirement for being a store of value. For that, you need a currency that has a monetary authority behind it and that authority is both committed and has the resources to maintain the value. For decentralized money instruments like the crypto currencies, this isn't true, and their value will fluctuate a lot depending mostly on demand for transactions and speculation.

    So yeah, if you "invest" in a crypto currency be aware that it may jump a lot, especially in the long run. And that you may get burned, just like you will if you "invest" in the currency of a small country that lets it float freely.

    Except that the crypto will be a lot more volatile.

    1. Re:Well, there are two functions of a currency. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen, bro. People who don't understand basic economics are bound to fail, just as people who don't understand basic physics are going to get things broken. Of course, it doesn't follow that people who do will do any better, but then that's thermodynamics.

      As for the volatility of the "small country's currency", people should do well to remember, that "small" here is a very flexible qualification.

      Even Britain was too small to win against the Soros-lead speculation back in the day, although it is technically a monetary authority with both commitment and resources to maintain stability of the pound.

      So yeah, the bitcoins are just as crazy as the FX margin trading.

  30. Let's see you do that with millions of dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitcoin don't care.

    1. Re:Let's see you do that with millions of dollars by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The reason why it takes a while for large sums is protection against money laundering. Without that in place some of the powers that are will quickly come down upon you and end your financial game.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Let's see you do that with millions of dollars by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      It also helps control check kiting.

    3. Re:Let's see you do that with millions of dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In those backwards nations where cheques are still a thing. Haven't signed a cheque since maybe 1999.

    4. Re:Let's see you do that with millions of dollars by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      I don't know if I should laugh or be sad...

      You haven't written a check.. so they aren't a thing...

      What businesses do you know that don't use at least some checks?

      You are a moron who is convinced the world is the size of the bubble you live in..

  31. A fool and his money are soon parted by jdoeii · · Score: 1

    EoM

  32. I was right. by devslash0 · · Score: 2

    I owned a considerable amount of bitcoins which I had mined a few years before. When the price jumped to $19 000 in December 2017, I judged that this speculative madness couldn't continue any longer and decided to turn my BTC into cash. Turns out I was right.

    1. Re:I was right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations on selling at pretty much the high point.
      How did u arrive at 19k, was there some reason?

    2. Re:I was right. by devslash0 · · Score: 1

      Selling at almost the highest observed price was sheer luck. My company held an early Christmas party last year during which almost everyone talked about BTC. That night, on my way home I thought to myself: "This is crazy. Everyone's buying bitcoins but they are pure speculation. Worse than the stock market. No cover in goods or services what-so-ever. Ever raising mining cost doesn't help either. This will KABOOM soon. I'm out." I found two really wealthy investors within a week and sold them all the bitcoins I owned. The price started tumbling down a week later.

  33. US Dollar has lost 97% of its value since 1913 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Store of value. What are you talking about???

    The USD has lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913; hell, in modern times, it is policy to target a price inflation rate of 2%. Also, how many other currencies have we seen throughout history implode to worthlessness due to governmental counterfeiting?

    In contrast, gold has held its purchasing power for literally hundreds if not thousands of years.

    No, sir. A currency need not hold its value long term—if it holds its value, then it is something more than a currency: Money, which need not be a currency.

    1. Re:US Dollar has lost 97% of its value since 1913 by Mr.+Dollar+Ton · · Score: 0

      Store of value. What are you talking about???

      I am talking about a scientific framework that will allow you to understand what determines the price of a currency.

      If you have a problem wrapping your head about it, I recommend a good book in macroeconomics.

      The USD has lost 97% of its purchasing power since 1913

      So what?

      In contrast, gold has held its purchasing power for literally hundreds if not thousands of years.

      So what? You can say gold is a better store of value and present your arguments. But you'll still be using the same framework of analysis.

      No, sir. A currency need not hold its value long termâ"if it holds its value, then it is something more than a currency: Money, which need not be a currency.

      You, sir, are quite confused and totally misunderstand my point due to substandard education.

      Please do yourself a service read a book or two and try to understand why people build models in which different aspects of a phenomenon are looked upon separately.

  34. The bird may have flown... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But there was an absurd amount of money to be made throughout 2017 and early 2018. If greed kept people in after Bitcoin $20,000, that's on them.

    1. Re:The bird may have flown... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no greed is people selling at $20.000

    2. Re:The bird may have flown... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. People selling at 20k is smart. Greed is people buying at 20k.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  35. Suffering immensely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Old gamblerâ(TM)s saying: Do not wager what you cannot bear to lose.

    They wanted to siphon money out of the system without doing actual work. As someone who does work for a living, I say fuck em. Cry me a goddamned river.

  36. Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Power hungry cargo cult...

  37. It's not immesurable by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unless you're shorting, the maximum you can lose is your initial investment. Which makes investing a dirt-simple risk proposition, since you automatically know before you invest your money exactly what's the maximum you could lose (all of it). So the amount these people have lost and are suffering is precisely measurable, and was precisely measurable before they ever invested.

    If you borrow money to invest (loans or leveraging), or short stocks (where the maximum gain is the value of the stock, while the maximum loss is potentially infinite - the inverse of buying stock) without understanding the risks involved, it's your own fault.

    I've bailed out friends and family members with loans - basically invested in them. But it's never affected me financially if they don't pay me back because I made each loan assuming they wouldn't pay me back and I would take a 100% loss. If they do end up paying me back, that's a bonus.

    1. Re:It's not immesurable by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      assuming they wouldn't pay me back and I would take a 100% loss. If they do end up paying me back, that's a bonus.

      YES. That's exacly the way to do it -- that way, you keep your friends. Otherwise if you're actually expecting them to pay you back and they don't, it'll tarnish your friendship. Just make sure they don't start avoiding YOU if they can't pay you back and they feel bad about it.

      OTOH, don't be a sucker, either. Or if you insist, lend ME some money -- I'll pay it back to you Any Day Now.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    2. Re:It's not immesurable by Oligonicella · · Score: 1
      Oh, the friendship is tarnished, you've just allowed that the amount of tarnish is acceptable. I've done the same for friends. Only once for those that don't repay.

      Just make sure they don't start avoiding YOU if they can't pay you back and they feel bad about it.

      You cannot control someone else's guilt.

    3. Re:It's not immesurable by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Or in short: Don't gamble more money than you can afford to lose. This simple and obvious rule seems to be widely unknown.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:It's not immesurable by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      If you lend someone $250 and they start avoiding you to pay you back, it was money well spent.

      My grandfather used to say that.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  38. This just in by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    People joining pyramid game late are taking heavy losses while those at the top cash out.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:This just in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "As Value of Cryptocurrencies Fall, a Lot of Idiots Who Thought They Could Get Rich Quick Are Suffering Immensely"

      FTFY, Slashdot (including the poor grammar).

    2. Re:This just in by Desler · · Score: 1

      Exactly and this quote was hilarious:

      "I guess I thought we were 'sticking it to the man' when I got on board," Mr. Herman said. "But I think 'the man' had already caught on, and had an exit strategy."

      No shit, sherlock? It's almost as if the whole thing was a massive pump and dump like people who weren't delusional were stating the whole time... I'm sure the Winkelvoss brothers were quite pleased at how much they made from these rubes.

    3. Re:This just in by gweihir · · Score: 1

      In other words, things are working as expected.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  39. Ponzi schemes are... by Martin+S. · · Score: 1

    Ponzi schemes are built on the greed of their victims.

    It's not rocket science, but some people are just too dumb to ever learn even when it's spelt out in the simplest terms.

    1. Re:Ponzi schemes are... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Replace "some" with "many" and you are right.

      What is even more surprising is that many people are unable to learn even when when they have been burnt before. There was a "Nigerian money scam" variant where they claimed that the Nigerian government would now compensate victims. All it takes was paying an advance fee. And yes, the fraudsters got even more money that way. Human lack of understanding how things work is really unlimited.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  40. Don't call them "investors" by aix+tom · · Score: 1

    An Investor is someone who puts his money into something that will actually create something long-term after careful consideration, and hopes for it to succeed, and make a long-term profit, while knowing it will be some time before it pays off, in which he will probably lose some money.

    Those crypto currencies, and also Wall Street these days, is nothing but a bunch of gamblers hoping to make money out of thin air, and jump from one sinking ship to another.

    1. Re:Don't call them "investors" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Projects like Ethereum, EOS, NEO, and many others actually do have the promise of producing something of value in the long-term.

    2. Re:Don't call them "investors" by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Calling the gamblers "investors" is part of the strategy to draw in even more fools.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  41. I got out at the top by captbollocks · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What really scared me was the number of people that were throwing big money in at the top. Some of these people were very smart people and they basically dropped $30-50k.

    They don't talk about Bitcoin so much anymore, and I don't ask.

    1. Re:I got out at the top by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 3, Interesting


      FOMO'ing and buying the top is something that happens in all markets. It is false to say this is because bitcoin is a scam and all that usual FUD.

      The problem is not crypto. It's people. The same trading errors they make in FX or stocks are repeated in crypto.

      Trading is not hard logically. It is challenging emotionally. Most people are afraid to buy when the price is low "what if it goes to 0??" and they then fear they won't "make a killing" as the price increases. With money on the line they fail to make good decisions based on compelling risk/reward calculations.

      They can be really smart but if they never traded before, never had skin in the game then they're just noobs. Noobs do noob things and when there's money on the line they lose it.

      Why people cannot bring themselves to paper trade for a year or so is beyond me. You do not need to lose money. Write $100k on a piece of paper. Risk no more than $2k loss on any one trade. Write your trades down, calculate fees. Write entries & exits. See if over a period of 1 year you can keep your $100k - most people cannot.

      What makes people think they can just sink $50k into something at random, no really knowing what it is they are buying, if the market is trending and expect to make large gains in a short period of time is simply beyond me.

      Trading is about taking other people's money. It's not nice and it's not fair. No one forced anyone to play the game.

      To address your post directly; it's not scary, it's one of the signs it's time to cash out and this ALWAYS happens when a market turns parabolic. That steep rising curve that looks like a sheer cliff drop...too many people that don't know what they are doing buy there.

      They will talk about bitcoin soon enough...when the next bull cycle starts.

      --
      A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    2. Re:I got out at the top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to post periodic sarcastic posts on Facebook about BTC every few weeks, just as a kind of moderator for all the pro-BTC guff I kept reading.

      One woman would troll me persistently, getting very angry, repeating all the same nonsense we all heard back then. I'd just politely point out things like the parallels with the South Seas Company, the lack of any real-world anchor for the price other than energy consumption, and so on. She'd scream epithets back at me every time, and she eventually unfriended me over it.

      I PM'd her and I said "look you can believe what you like about BTC but for God's sake don't cash in your pension and don't borrow any money to invest with". I was hoping she'd reply with something like "I know, I'm not stupid". But she never did :(

    3. Re:I got out at the top by captbollocks · · Score: 1

      You don't need to go back so far for parallels, try dot com 1.0 and the last real estate boom.

    4. Re:I got out at the top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought $100 worth of Bitcoin when it was selling for $1 a coin. I held onto it for a while and it went to $2 a coin. I sold all of it when it dropped back to $1 a coin. I was glad that I got out of Bitcoin when I did.

    5. Re:I got out at the top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This exactly. People who are saying, "ponzi-scheme", or, "tulip bulbs", I really don't get that. Bitcoin has been around for around a decade now? Alternative coins have been around for some 3 or 4 years?


      The main, "goal", has always been to basically tell the banks to fuck off and tell national currencies to fuck off. I'm not sure that goal has materialized; but, the perceived value of the cryptographic tokens certainly has. For fucks sake, you could actually buy things at major online retailers with Bitcoin, I think you still can. That is the definition of money. A medium with a defined value for the exchange of goods.


      Now, because Bitcoin's perceived value has risen to such a drastic height, it functions much more like stocks than actual currency. So all these people losing money are, if I am not incorrect, really no different than people losing money at the stock market. The stock market is simple, "buy low, sell high". Although playing the stock market is never really that simple because know what low and high are, are always the difficult part to determine. You can use anything from crazy intuition to crazy market analysis and you still may be wrong in the end. Playing the stock market is a lot like playing poker. A lot of people do it, a few people are pros, and in the end there is still a bit of luck involved, even if you play it safe.


      The way a lot of cryptocurrencies actually function is a bit weird; but, being the way things are and how the code is usually always free/libre, changes can be made. I would say the only major design flaws of any cryptocurrency is the amount physical electricty required to keep building the chain up and completing transactions, as well as the rate at which transactions can occur. The first problem can be solved with technological innovation over time, perhaps, we will even see an incentivization point to create better faste technology to complete more blocks. The other problem, transaction limitations, is most likely something that can be solved at a source code or implementation level


      Are cryptocurrencies the game changing monetary authority decapitator? Probably not. Fiscal policies, as best my understanding is, are usually implemented by the rule of law. Software may help and be a tool; but, at the end of the day, a society governed by the people, for the people, most likely has all it's responsibility in affecting policy change, burdened upon the people. If the people are too busy trying to make a living wage to be able to effectively govern themselves; then, policy change is likely not very possible. Furthermore, it's the financial institutions themselves that have been running amuck and fucking around with cryptocurrencies to a very large degree. I mean just a few short years ago you could get a bitcoin visa card. That's a serious degree of legitimization by an institution of which, at it's heart, is the enemy of the end goal of cryptocurrencies.


      Any easy way to curb a rebellion of any kind is to sort of legitimize it within a sandbox. You sort of map out where the end destination of the path people are on towards completion of rebellion. Then you find the closest point on that path you can that you are certain everyone must run into. Then you create a diversionary fork in the road that basically says, "rebellion end point THIS WAY"; but what you are really doing is leading people off the path. You legitimize the rebellion and detour it into oblivion. The new path you creates goes away from the destructive end point and basically leads people around in endless circles (while probably trying to sell them popcorn and peanuts along the way) until they get tired of going in circles, run out of money, give up, etc...


      A Bitcoin like digital currency would probably be a dystopian future nightmare if implemented properly in that sense. Imagine every single monetary transaction being known and recorded for 100 years. Taxes could be automatically deduced and point in a matter of seconds, p

  42. Currencies are for transaction, not investment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, to be usable as a token for transactions, they need to have some value retention as you need to be comfortable keeping them until you need them. Bitcoin has not found the right recipe for balancing its decentralized nature with being robust against the fluctuations in a supply-and-demand driven (and stupid crazy) market.

    And it's not the loss of half its value in half a year that illustrates this as much as its explosion in value and consequent turn into an object of speculation.

    Its large fluctuations make it suitable as currency only where its advantages are worth the price because the margins of the goods you trade using it are even higher. It works for that somewhat well in drug trades, money laundering, blackmail. Which is why it hasn't crashed harder yet.

  43. The most interesting thing about Bitcoin for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is whether or not it will ever die off completely or remain around very long term, even after all coins are mined and progressively more are lost due to mismanagement or wilful deletion. I think the value may rise and fall dramatically over time but staying power is an interesting factor.

  44. Where are those slashdotters? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

    So where are they guys on /. who were advocating buying in February, March, and April, stating that BTC was worth north of $100,000?

    Did they cash out? Are they still buying now? What are their outlooks for the currency now?

    --
    Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    1. Re:Where are those slashdotters? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      I don't know about these guys, but I know my Dogecoins still have a trade ratio of 1:1 for other Dogecoins!

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    2. Re:Where are those slashdotters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. Don't buy bitcoin, it's going to CRAAASSH :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    3. Re: Where are those slashdotters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's nothing. Kim Dotcom said it would be worth $300,000 soon.

  45. Ponzi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ponzi ponzi ponzi

  46. Re:Great investment by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Bitcoins is a bit like pumpkins. Pumpkins are also a great investment, but you want to sell before Halloween.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  47. I did earn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Entered in November with $5000 and pulled out with $7500 just on the day the bubble first started popping. In next months i was riding ALT wave and got to $12500 before pulling out completely. Now it looks sad but I'm staying clear of it at the moment ; or maybe it's time to get back in? It's like gambling.

    1. Re:I did earn by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Put back 10% of your winnings into lower-cost ALT coins... just in case.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  48. Here's a sure fire way to recover those loses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unsubscribe from the New York Times!

  49. Still Valued Too High by StormReaver · · Score: 1

    Cryptocurrencies won't have corrected adequately until they have a negative valuation. Whatever their greater than or equal to zero value is right now, it's still much too high.

    Cryptocurrencies are completely worthless, and always have been, except to the morally bankrupt people above the bottom of the pyramid who knowingly suckered in the people below them. It stuns me how this was not obvious to everyone from the very beginning.

    And the people who mortgaged their houses to burn it in the market are immense fools. My heart bleeds for them and their families, but that was immensely idiotic. My brain can't even comprehend that degree of stupid.

    1. Re:Still Valued Too High by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is there IS a value - except it's all bad.

      Crypto supports ransomware, drug sales on the dark net, money transfers when you don't want johnny law to see them.

      I never supported it because it was clear it's morally bankrupt. Obviously wish I'd made 20,000x roi - but while the money would help me laugh it off, not sure I'd feel good about supporting that system - nor selling to ignorant korean mothers and ripping them off.

      But hey - supporting it is probably not the worst thing most of us have done in our lives. So, whatever.

  50. exit strategy - find fools and sell to them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I observed that first spike in Bitcoin value that was signal
    Oho! it is lure for morons .... to sell then sure ticket to get rich....
    Time to sell and leave business ...
    I bought some bitcoins early for ... do not laugh international transactions ... it is cheaper than bank transfers ...
    Of course I was happy when they went high. Bonus vacation money are fun.
    I am net positive, but still working my day job :-)

  51. Risk not understood. by stooo · · Score: 2

    Risk-Taking Investors take risks. News at 11.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  52. Irrational exuberance ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately all of the hype around cryptocurrency basically created a whole lot of people thinking they were going to be zillionaires.

    The reality was, it was an over-hyped, completely unregulated, and entirely speculative market.

    While it's sad that people are losing lots of money, there was absolutely no rational basis to have ever believed they'd become rich.

    This is a case of fools being parted with their money.

  53. Ground floor crims by Mandrel · · Score: 1

    Cryptocurrency's anonymity attracted criminals from the get go. So I'm not surprised that cryptocurrency markets turned out to be even more a den of snakes.

    1. Re:Ground floor crims by captbollocks · · Score: 1

      Most crims are only interested in moving or laundering money, the pump and dump crims are called brokers.

  54. It's a game where you might win money by Beeftopia · · Score: 1

    The similarities between non-voting, non-dividend paying stocks and units of crypto are many. People get involved in both because they are games in which one can win money, with a suitable helping of luck, and maybe skill. Kind of like blackjack. Less like poker. Some people win. Most lose.

    The key to these things - including also the art market - is the belief that there is a pool of demand out there for the item. Prick that belief and the game spins down.

  55. 1600s Tulips all over again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.investopedia.com/t...

    Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to relive it.

  56. A few clarifications by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1
    • Just like with shares crypto-currencies are not 100% covered with real money. For instance, even though Apple is valued at a trillion dollars, no one will be able to sell all Apple shares and get a trillion dollars for them.
    • At the moment crypto-currencies' value is largely determined by trading bots, not real people. Their use case is still nascent.
    • There's a whole lot of speculation in the crypto market and if you enter the market you have to remember that. The returns might be enormous but such are the risks.
    • A year ago Bitcoin cost $4,000 which means the people who bought it at its peak ($19,500) can still expect to get profits if they wait long enough. Unlike fiat money, there's no inflation in bitcoin.
    • As more people enter the market the value of valid crypto-coins will keep on steadily increasing.
    • Bitcoin and Ethereum mining are not the worst things people waste energy on.
  57. TYS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TYS.

  58. Sorry, no. by Lisandro · · Score: 1

    I can't feel bad if someone decides to take all their savings and loans to invest in anything.

  59. When a lady down the street becomes "investor" by rkordmaa · · Score: 1

    "a 45-year-old teacher.... She drew on savings, an insurance policy and a $25,000 loan."
    You know things are about to go tits up when "investors" such as these start crawling out of the woodworks.

  60. risk takers take risk. by houghi · · Score: 1

    Risk takers take risk. News at 11.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  61. Value? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

    There is a difference between "value" and "price".

    What was falling was the PRICE of cryptocurrencies, not its value.

    Now, arguably, since cryptocurrencies are, well, currency, the "price" and "value" are identical. Which would mean that the value fell along with the price.

    Nonetheless, it is more accurate in general to use "price", especially when it's doubtful whether "value" applies....

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    1. Re:Value? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Now, arguably, since cryptocurrencies are, well, currency, the "price" and "value" are identical. Which would mean that the value fell along with the price.
      Nonetheless, it is more accurate in general to use "price", especially when it's doubtful whether "value" applies....

      You wrote that whole comment just to say that the two are the same thing, but you think it's more accurate to use price? Srsly? Just no.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  62. someone with 90k disposable income not poor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol. If you have 90k to just drop on an investment you aren't poor.

  63. Elon's got the goods by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

    I just hope Elon builds the rocket in time.

    He's completed it! For some reason it looks a lot like a submarine with rocket fins bolted on, but I'm sure it's the real deal... Elon even said that anyone who doesn't like it is a pedophile.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  64. For any scam by plague911 · · Score: 1

    some make money, but most lose it.

  65. Time for buy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitcoin is best investment you can make. I have made hundreds thousands dollars all the time. Remember last time naysayers and technology illiterates and SJW's said bad things about bitcoin I went up 10,000% and make instant millionares overnight! If you are smart understanding of economics and objectivism insight like me you should sell all your stocks and gold boullion and put all instead into bitcoin while our price is low. Just look at how many story's there are on News.Slashdot.Org about bitcoin, so you know it is here to stay. Guaranteed investment.

    1. Re:Time for buy. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

      "I have made hundreds thousands dollars all the time."

      All what time?

      "make instant millionares overnight! "

      Which is it, instant, or overnight? I only want instant, overnight is much too long - not enough return on my investment.

      "Guaranteed investment."

      But guaranteed to do what?

    2. Re:Time for buy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a dumb guy if you dont even read plane english.

  66. Good riddance! by superdude72 · · Score: 1

    With dollars, you can stuff them in your mattress for a year and when you come back they'll purchase about the same amount. That's a good thing. You shouldn't have to take a risk just to store value. A currency that does its job ought to suck as a high-yield investment.

    Maybe now we can get cryptocurrencies back to their best use, which is purchasing drugs on the dark web.

    1. Re:Good riddance! by James+Carnley · · Score: 1

      I found the guy who doesn't know what inflation is. You are one of today's lucky 10,000.

  67. IRAs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've started hearing radio ads to add crypto currency to your IRA, that is government approved and everything. No different than the gold and silver spammers on television saying protect your assets, buy up some of our over stocked gold or silver, both are poised to explode to record highs. They've been poised for years.

  68. It's sort of like "investing" in gold. by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    When the price goes up, there's a lot of advertising to sell it to dopes, and when the price goes down, you hear nothing about it.

    Who would have ever predicted that the price of digital currency would start to come into line with its value?

  69. Re:Still Priced Too High by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    FTFY

  70. Stupid is as stupid does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you wait until the mania to invest, you have missed the boat. The same thing happened to people during the dot com boom, the housing boom, the commodities boom, and now the remnants of the crypto boom.

    The big money investors know that if they bid up a sector to outrageous price points, Main Street will want to get in on the action and transfer huge sums of wealth to the big money investors. Main street always waits until they feel "safe," but the problem is that Main Street is a dumbass.

  71. It's speculation, not investing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a Buffetism or a Ben Graham thing. I forget.

    People putting money into bitcoin are not investors. They are speculators. They are hoping that the price of an item goes up because they want it to go up. There is no underlying business model supporting the idea that the price of bitcoin will go up.

    The implosion of bitcoin was inevitable and in 20 years it will be totally worthless unless it is still used for hookers and blow.

  72. bitcoin deniers, you are so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  73. Enjoy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all about the ride. Enjoy!

  74. To me it was a great experience. by jf_moreira · · Score: 1

    I was very lucky. Got it all into Bitcoin in November or so and left December 10, 2017. Made more than 150% in roughly a month with a bit of trading. A week after, the thing crashed here. I was very...very lucky, nothing more than that. Currently, I have nothing invested anymore.

  75. Well... close enough to a Ponzi scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lets look at the history of Bitcoin. Mysterious figure comes on the scene, posts guidelines on it, has a ton of currency, a ton of people start getting involved early on.

    BTC has been a pump and dump thing since 2014, where the entire design of the currency is to reward miners early on, back when GPUs or even CPUs could crank out coins as opposed to highly specialized ASIC farms. People late to the party pay the huge investment costs, which reward those who mined it back when it didn't take huge amounts of energy to make.

    Early adopters -- rich, latecomers -- paying the costs. If it quacks like a duck...

    1. Re:Well... close enough to a Ponzi scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Lets look at the history of Bitcoin. Mysterious figure comes on the scene ...

      Naw....we all know it was Al Gore. Oh wait, no, that was the Carbon Certificate scheme...

    2. Re:Well... close enough to a Ponzi scheme by shaitand · · Score: 1

      You've just described pretty much all technology. People are not supposed to be investing and getting rich in the long term and there is nothing wrong with rewarding those who took the burden of investing in mining systems or time, yes it didn't cost heavy cash investment but it wasn't nearly so simple to mine and get set up when you could do it with a cpu. It cost time and effort, it cost a great deal of time and effort to develop the system. Early adopters profited because they took risk and gambled on something when it wasn't certain it would catch on.

      If you are a speculator whose interest is just making a quick buck I agree with you, this isn't the right place to do it. If you are a people looking for a superior solution to currency this is exactly where you should look.

      People have voted and crypto-currency isn't going anywhere. In the US most of the adopters have been financial and other institutions wanting to flip the blockchain on its head to destroy privacy and outliers thus keeping our nobles in power and speculators who wanted a quick buck. These are exactly the people who should lose by betting on Bitcoin.

    3. Re:Well... close enough to a Ponzi scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the Chinese controlled miners controlling a 51% or more bloc, but promised to not do any hanky-panky? Sure... I trust Bitcoin there.

      Crypto-currency != BTC. Enough with that straw man. Bitcoin specifically is designed to get early adopters rich while deliberately making it hard for late arrivals to get out should a crash happen. Want to cash your coins right now? Better slap a hefty "tip" to the miner for your transaction, or be prepared to wait days to weeks for your transaction to hit the blockchain.

      Bitcoin also isn't private. There are a good many people in prison who have learned that lesson. It is trivial for LEOs to trace a wallet if it is used, and the blockchain transactions are better than a signed confession made in an auditorium of witnesses for ensuring that someone is held dead to rights, legally.

      As for Big Money winning; they have. Bitcoin's mining bloc is completely owned by the Chinese, with no room for anyone interested, and the currency is too volatile for trade. To boot, the blockchain requires 200+ gigabytes to verify (well, unless you want to trust someone, and we all know how trustworthy exchanges are, like the fate of MtGox, etc.)

      Keep your Bitcoin to yourself. The currency is in the process of imploding, and people are shilling left and right hoping to get some new suckers in to replace the old ones that bailed.

      Want to look at cryptocurrencies? There are more useful currencies that actually protect your privacy. Monero comes to mind. Yes, you -can- tumble Bitcoin stuff, but with the time and cost of transactions, it just isn't worth it. I much rather mine some other currency that is a lot easier, then shapeshift it to Bitcoin, should I choose to go that route.

  76. In the words of Nelson - Haha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
     

  77. Nothing new here by bspus · · Score: 1

    Crypto veterans and true enthusiasts have seen this happen before. The 2014 bear market lasted over 2 years. They are not worried.

    It is disappointing however to see posts like this and the usual replies.

    Those people mentioned taking loans or thinking about sticking it to the man are just pathetic and they deserve what they got. If it wasn't bitcoin, it would have been the dotcom bubble or something else.
    Particularly the Korean woman who lost 90%. That could only have happened if she invested in shitcoins, probably expecting higher gains than typical.
    When something goes parabolic, a heavy correction is inevitable and that is irrespective of the value of the asset, whatever you may think it is. Anyone who fails to understand basic concepts has no business investing in anything.

    And again, nobody focuses on actually learning what the tech is about, how it can be useful and why. All they care about is making money fast and easy. I'm sorry it doesn't work that way and it's not bitcoin's fault. There is only one way this could go for people like them.

    The others, who know why they put their money (not more than they can afford) into bitcoin and actually bothered reading up before doing so are not worried.

    In the end, if you believe that bitcoin has a future and adoption will increase, today's marketcap is far too small, and (longterm) increase is inevitable.
    If you believe it's just the latest craze and will die out, you should never invest a penny in it.

  78. Colossal stupidity by drew_kime · · Score: 1

    "I guess I thought we were 'sticking it to the man' when I got on board," Mr. Herman said. "But I think 'the man' had already caught on, and had an exit strategy."

    Not quite. "The man" is still invested in hard currencies and real stocks. "The man" for the most part never needed an exit strategy, because they were never in to begin with.

    --
    Nope, no sig
  79. Don't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a dumbass get-rich-quick sucker, don't care.

  80. More of a lottery really by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    What I mostly saw from small investors was folks who had a small amount of savings (under $50k, often _well_ under $50k...) and were nearing the age where they couldn't work anymore. Buddy of mine's in that boat. Not a lot of skills. Not a bad guy just kind of a flake. Hard worker but hard work can only take you so far. Parents are still alive and a pretty big burden on him too. He got stuck taking care of them in a town with no jobs.

    He threw a little of his savings at crypto because he's desperate and doesn't know what else to do. It's not "someone dumber" it's "maybe this'll work, and I've got very little to lose". It's like buying a lottery ticket. It's desperate hope of the kind that we wouldn't need if we had a better safety net and retirement system.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  81. That's desperation by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    multiple studies have shown people under high stress make poor choices. It's one of the reasons the cycle of poverty exits.

    As for bad investments, the rich make them all the time. 80% of startups fail and they make their money on the 20%. The difference between a rich man and a poor man is the rich man can spread risk around in such a way to always make a profit. They're like bookie.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  82. Hardship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me if you can come up with $90k in cash, there are probably better ways to escape "hardship". I don't know this lady or her situation, but at first glance, this statement does not engender any feelings of sympathy in me.

  83. Sticking it to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the man. I don't think you know who (((the man))) is or how foolish playing his own game against him is.

  84. Re:Great investment by porges · · Score: 1

    With the modification that you don't know when Halloween is until afterwards.

  85. The AC just crushed your model. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AC gave you a better model.

    You are conflating money and currency. They are not the same thing.

  86. Stick $10k in you mattress and see what happens. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If explicit government policy works out, your $10k willl be worth only about $9804. That's a lot of lost purchasing power!

  87. Good!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now maybe the price of graphics cards will drop so normal Joe Six-Pack can afford them instead of all the bitcoin farms buying them up, driving the price of them up as well.....

  88. Government steals your "savings" through inflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you stuffed $50k under your mattress about 5 years ago, it is now worth $46,347.31 in terms of purchasing power 5 years ago; by "saving", the government has stolen $3652.69 in just 5 years.

  89. Obviously, you don't travel much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm afraid you've just revealed your sheltered life.

    People who travel internationally are familiar with the need to exchange (or, rather, buy) various currencies; certainly, they are familiar with the fact that the value of one currency changes quite a bit relative to the value of another currency, on a day-to-day and definitely year-to-year basis.

    Among these people, it is therefore quite common to invest in currencies, because they see indications that a currency's value might go up relative to their own major holdings in another currency.

    You see, when you buy a currency, you are investing in the entire economy that is denominated in that currency.

    When you buy the Russian ruble, you are investing in the Russian-ruble economy; when you buy the U.S. dollar, you are investing in the U.S.-dollar economy (which is enormous and virtually global).

    When you buy bitcoin, you are investing in the bitcoin economy.

    1. Re:Obviously, you don't travel much by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Most (responsible) currency traders are taking advantage of arbitrage, not speculating on currency. Naturally people like that do exist, and there may even be people who are successful at it - but that is a byproduct of our use of multiple currencies, not the reason for it.

      Currencies are not an investment.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:Obviously, you don't travel much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's crazy talk!

      I'm from Argentina, where EVERYONE always knows the price of the US dollar because we have a big inflation and no trust in our own Peso currency.

      ... We still know that the US dollar is not an investment, because in the long run it ALWAYS goes down because of inflation (which even the US has). We buy dollars because it fares better than the Peso and because it's not as scary / volatile as stock, bonds, etc. so it's the conservative option...

      ... but FAR from being a financial instrument which generates value... it just loses it slowly.

  90. Bitcoin "cash" is not the current version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The current version of Bitcoin is whatever protocol is dominant among both miners and other users.

    Your "Bitcoin cash" is NOT the current protocol or version of the software.

  91. Really more an asset bubble by Koreantoast · · Score: 1

    I think a better comparison would be to an asset bubble similar to tulips, 1990s tech stocks, 2008 housing crisis, etc. There is some value in bitcoins, and perhaps more general cryptocurrencies, but the market has clearly not yet figured out how to effectively evaluate and price them yet.

  92. Not a stable saving strategy by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    Go look at a gold chart and now use a stock picker to search through ETFs, if you search for lower beta or moderate growth ETFs there are tons of them that will make you much more money on anything except short term scales and have rarely lost any signifiant value.
    If you have a nice diverse portfolio with gold I guess that's on you maybe you know something that I don't but the very existence of the uneducated gold fetish investor means that the price of gold could do anything at any time.

    To illustrate this point let's say I invested in gold at a really good time, 16 years ago. My highest interest savings account pays 5%. You would have only double the money in gold vs the savings account. This is best case, also you would have gotten to enjoy the roller coaster, watching gold's value increase several times over around 2011 and then rapidly lose half of that, you having no idea when it would stop.
    You need to invest broadly for stability, ETFs, mutual funds, etc. Not individual stocks or commodities. Even then stocks like Visa are still by far much better and more stable than gold by a long shot.
    If you're investing in gold I suggest you spend an afternoon looking through a stock picker, learn what beta and p/e ratio means and look. Don't read blogs, don't listen to cnn or fox or reddit. Then when you have an idea of the investment options that are out there evaluate your reasons for investing in gold.

    Gold is a stupid investment.

  93. So get rich quick failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So a few people who were trying to get rich quick failed at it and lost money. Boo-hoo, cry me a river.

  94. MINER MINER FORTY-NINER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1849. Relive the dream. Again. Make 'murika Greedy Again.

    1. Re: MINER MINER FORTY-NINER by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      The 1849 'gold rush' was about convincing a lot of white Americans on the eastern half of the continent to move to California. President Polk had just acquired California from Mexico as spoils of war, and the US needed a lot of white people to move there fast to occupy it.

    2. Re: MINER MINER FORTY-NINER by skam240 · · Score: 1

      No, the gold rush was about people mining gold. That's why they call it a gold rush. No gold, no gold rush.

      The gold rush was then taken advantage of by president Polk who encouraging people to move there yadda, yadda, yadda...

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  95. Re:Government steals your "savings" through inflat by magzteel · · Score: 1

    If you stuffed $50k under your mattress about 5 years ago, it is now worth $46,347.31 in terms of purchasing power 5 years ago; by "saving", the government has stolen $3652.69 in just 5 years.

    Inflation risk is just another risk to be considered

  96. Buying at the peak by TJHook3r · · Score: 1

    If an investment appears in the pages of tabloids then you'd better be shorting. No news here, just simple greed. Hope all the dealers on the darknets didn't get stung too badly, they were the only ones actually using it!

  97. Because that's the price someone has actually paid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is an objective datum. People are buying coins for that much; it's near-term history, which is a good indication of near-term future.

  98. Bitcoin is still up over where it was last year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you purchased Bitcoin last year this time it was around $4,000 USD. It's still over $6300 USD. People- including fellow slashdotters here- are just stupid. It was over valued, but it doesn't mean crypto currencies are worthless and its still likely been a better investment (not that I'd encourage anybody to invest in it) for most and anybody who has been investing in it for a while than any other investment your typical person would have made. Crypto currencies offer a lot of value in reducing the transactional costs of doing business and adding privacy and anonymity and control over ones money and transactions. For those who have been doing this for years none of what we have seen is a surprise. Suck it up- or quit while its down. It's your own undoing. If you don't understand why fiat currencies are so expensive economically, or think your not paying 6-12% more on near every transaction most of you make fooling yourself. You just don't understand the economics and costs of the banking system, credit card transaction costs, and so on that impact your spending power. Relative to crypto currencies even Bitcoin is amazing with "high" fees (today, compared to other crypto currencies in wide use like Dash and Bitcoin Cash, and no trading volume doesn't mean shit if there is no actual business being conducted, which is why Dash is on this list still, because Dash is actually being widely used in one of the few regions people are actually using crypto currencies; ie New Hampshire).

  99. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was supposed to be a stable current to substitute for cash. Not as an investment opportunity.

    Perhaps it will come down to a decent value, and stay there.

  100. Re:Government steals your "savings" through inflat by martinX · · Score: 1

    If you put 100,000 bolívares fuertes on the table on Monday, today they'd be worth 1 bolívar soberano. Maybe less.

    --
    When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
  101. Compelling! Not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh my, [e-currency of interest] is [up/down] by [random amount] over [trivial interval of time]. You have convinced me, that's for sure!

    You have convinced me that you are Fool, and Your Money will be leaving your possession via a Different Door than You.

  102. Re: Government steals your "savings" through infla by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    That's just the risk of investing in socialism.

  103. Re: Government steals your "savings" through infla by orlanz · · Score: 1

    Putting it under the mattress is not "savings". That's being the fool. Put it in the bank. Up to $250k, your savings are protected by the federal government. Even if you die, the US government will find your next of kin and give them that monies.

    Do the same at other governments and see how it works out.

    Seriously, why is basic investing & savings knowledge even a discussion on Slashdot?

  104. Life lessons can be harsh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This was simply a lesson for the young, inexperienced or foolish.

    I'm actually surprised there aren't lawsuits flying about over folks losing everything they had on foolhardy investments.

    Welcome to reality kids. You might want to hang on because it's a pretty rough ride.

  105. Re: Government steals your "savings" through infl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey! Socialism will work when we do it this time.

  106. Re: Government steals your "savings" through infl by Bruha · · Score: 1

    Thatâ(TM)s not socialism. Itâ(TM)s a dictatorship. Thereâ(TM)s a difference.

  107. One thing people miss as well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Is that, Gold, for instance, which used to back the U.S. dollar and has been a medium of exchange for thousands of years, requires very little technical know how to acquire. If you want some gold, you just have to find some by digging it up and separating it from it's surrounding impurities. Cryptocurrencies on the other hand heavily incentivize any users of it to keep their level of civilization at the point of which it can be utilized.

    In other words, in order to mine cryptocurrency you need to be able to produce electrical power and you need to be able create the silicon chips necessary to do the calculations to mine it. In addition, computers need to be ubiquitous enough that people can hold and transact with the currency. Furthermore, if a particular cryptocurrency starts to misbehaving (the people running it or the majority owners of it start being nefarious douche-bags), all you need to do is fork the code over and start using a different currency.

    Maybe cryptocurrencies will go the way of the BBS and some new and better way or version of, 'blockchain tech', will appear, perhaps something better than it. Maybe not.

  108. Walmart analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US Federal Reserve System is a stand-alone government entity, like the National Park Service or the IRS

    Sure it is, in the same way that the Money Center at Walmart is a stand-alone entity.

  109. Well... by jf_moreira · · Score: 1

    I'm so glad I entered into bitcoin, made 150% profit over my investment and left one week after the crash with all my original money and profit intact. All of that in like a month or so. Many did not have the same luck. Money exchanged hands quickly in december and january...

    1. Re:Well... by jf_moreira · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I meant "one week before the crash", obviously. LOL

  110. .\s complaining about "greed". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lots of people bitching here saying others were greedy, but without greed the financial market would never exist.
    Humans are all hypocrites. No exceptions to this rule yet.

  111. Blockchain not mature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea of a decentralized authentication mechanism, the one underlying all crypto currencies, is very appealing. The people behind bitcoin and the blockchain knew it was an experiment, and recently they labeled the experiment as "failed".

    Many will now jump on the bandwagon, but it was fairly obvious from the beginning that the blockchain has some deep flaws: huge energy expenditure, the 51% attack, the very limited bandwidth, and more. People who "invested" in cryptocurrencies were gambling. Some made out like bandits, but most have or will lose.

    Nonetheless, the blockchain idea should continue to be researched. It is a very smart idea in spite of the flaws.

  112. A total coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Producing slightly too much currency every year, as our Federal Reserve does, is a better approach

    ...which just happens to allow governments to fund themselves, under the radar of the common man, via currency devaulation. No need to be suspicious -- this is a total coincidence.

  113. Smug satisfaction by strikethree · · Score: 1

    I am sitting here smiling. I did not participate in the cryptocurrency craze. I knew there was money to be made, or lost, but making money with cryptocurrency (not mining, but investing) felt unethical to me, so I didn't participate.

    I am smiling at the karmic experience going on here. Many who were "investing" were trying to get something for nothing.

    --
    "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  114. Unfortunately.... by Doctrinsograce · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately this is in the nature of risk taking. If you invest in something that has no risk, there will be little return. It is how things have always and ever worked.

  115. By the time we average schmoes heard about it ... by FreedomFirstThenPeac · · Score: 1

    By the time we average schmoes heard about cryptocurrency, the big guys were exiting taking their profits from our enthusiasm.

    --
    "There is no god but allah" - well, they got it half right.
  116. Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > She drew on savings, an insurance policy and a $25,000 loan.

    My investment perspective? Don't invest money you can't risk losing. Anything you don't mind losing is fair game.

    With that in mind, drawing on your savings is a dumb idea, unless it's a small part of your savings you don't mind losing.

    Drawing on an insurance policy is a plain dumb idea.

    Now, drawing on **a fucking loan** to invest money is the dumbest thing of all. The money's gone, and she still owes it back.

  117. Morons invest in bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All virtual currency investment is idiotic. Only morons invest. So I find it very hard to be sympathetic.

    1. Re:Morons invest in bitcoin by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Scared of the new thing? Don't worry, it won't bite you..

      You don't sound like you disprove of Bitcoin, you sound like you are terrified of it, terrified of something you don't understand..

      I'm not making a call on cryptocurrencies either way. No pro or con. I don't know enough about them.

  118. Heisenberg by i286NiNJA · · Score: 1

    Won't someone think of the internet meth dealers!

  119. Re: Government steals your "savings" through infl by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

    A dictatorship of the proletariat.

    Led, of course, by people who've appointed themselves the vanguard of the proletariat.

    Funny how that always works.