I’m disappointed to not see comments saying how bad of an investment Bitcoin is.
The only reason I didn’t buy Bitcoin when it was $1 was because of the HN comments. I try to do the opposite of what people are commenting here now.
The only reason I didn’t buy Bitcoin when it was $1 was because of the HN comments. I try to do the opposite of what people are commenting here now.
By now, it seems that most of the original arguments about Bitcoin becoming the currency of the future didn’t pan out. In fact, very few people seem eager to spend Bitcoin because everyone wants it as a speculative investment vehicle. The narrative about what Bitcoin will be used for continues to wander, but for whatever reason the Bitcoin crowd doesn’t want to admit that it holds a unique place as a speculative investment and trading vehicle that has one foot outside of regulatory boundaries, making it inherently attractive to people hoping for abnormal returns.
This is also why you see big banks taking on numerically large positions that are nevertheless a very small portion of their overall portfolios: It’s a weird investment that might produce interesting returns, or it might not. Unfortunately, this news usually gets spun into hot takes that banks secretly predict Bitcoin is the future currency, which leads to more hype and more investment. This effectively makes large Bitcoin investments a self-fulfilling prophecy, as long as the banks manage to get out before the next big down cycle.
I think this is freely admitted as the primary value proposition by many Bitcoin proponents
I think it is a misconception and misunderstanding by many BTC supporters and naysayers that BTC can be viable or that it necessarily must depend on being viable as a mass-transaction medium, unit of account or "currency".
Store of value is likely it's only function, but being finite, highly divisible, decentralized and highly transactable relative to other scarce assets, it could succeed wildly at this.
The scalability issues were evident from the beginning. The idea of running Visa scale transactions on a shared ledger were debated back in 2010. Anyone paying attention knew the main chain would, at best, be a large scale settlement layer. Other layers would be needed for day to day transactions.
It is trading at about 0.013 BTC, which IMO is in line with their current impact.
For those true to the _original_ Bitcoin Cash chain. lol
Bitcoin is arguably the most stable of all crypto right now (outside of stablecoins of course). There are smallcap and midcap coins that can go from -100% to +500% in a month.
Even large, established coins like XRP can go from flatlining for years to 3x in price in a week.
The best part is that no one really knows whats happening, and everyone has their own theories.
Thinking of the price of Bitcoin is a fairly irrelevant endeavour.
Thinking how much BTC it costs to buy one USD (not hard money by a huge margin) over time is a much more productive way of looking at it.
(yes, I've heard of f(x)=1/x I'm talking about a psychological stance here)
Earlier than that, I might sell a little bit in the upcoming year to free up some cash for a home purchase.
Also that you are blindingly listening to others would make you a bad investor. A good investor needs conviction and staying power.
Would you have sold after Bitcoin has crashed from $30 to $2?
That's exactly it. Let's say you bought at $0.01. What are the odds you would have held on until the price per coin hit $10,000? Or $1,000? Or even $100?
The higher this number is, the better argument it is for Bitcoin's "Lindy" qualities
Same principle as a lot of VC, if you invest in fifty failed startups and one Facebook, you win.
You and me both. Fortunately, I've learned most hackers have an extreme risk avoidance, which tops the usual human fear of whatever didn't exist when someone was a teen.
Fortunately, I quickly realized the HN kings had no clothes, so I didn't double down on my mistake and started working in crypto.
That asymmetry means investing even just a small amount (that you're comfortable losing) is an obvious choice.
It's also a fascinating technology (politics and monetary theories aside) and having some "skin in the game" makes you much more motivated to learn about how it works.
The fact is nobody knew where it was going back then. In hindsight sure you can try to shift the blame to others, but seriously I have always noticed that if I do investments based on emotional whims without understanding what I am actually buying I never feel comfortable owning said asset. Then I have no idea if the current price is right or wrong and whether I should sell it or not.
But coming back to your main point, it is more than usual that no small portion of HN comments are conservative and critical towards any new innovations. Therefore, it is up to the reader to make their own research and judgement before taking anything said here for granted. I like that criticality, to some extent, as that keeps you grounded in reality but it is true for certain that some of it is just plain old resistance to change.
I didn’t know enough about it, and deferred to the “experts”
Also, Bitcoin draws libertarians... and HN is full of modern liberals. So, it doesn't sit well with them.
Having said that, it is understandable that most people won't invest in something completely new or risky. One would not be able to build wealth like that. They'd be taking too many risks and that could most likely work against them.
So, a good balance needs to be maintained. If you most of your money in safe assets and try out small risky things once in a while, you are relatively safe while opening up to being lucky.
Your statement is true but Democrats, who call themselves liberals, are not that. They are the most conservative party. They're much more conservative than Republicans on most issues. For example, ideas about "science" or "nature" for example.
In 2020, "liberals" in america have very little to do with the original meaning of the word which meant "in favor of freedom".
If there is one thing the liberals in the US have very little care about it is preserving freedom.
It's the main reason they got spanked by trump in '16.
It has very little to do with the European understanding of "liberalism", which is what americans call "libertarians".
> If there is one thing the liberals in the US have very little care about it is preserving freedom
You can't spend more than 2 seconds researching modern liberalism without civil liberties coming up.
Funny :D
>You can't spend more than 2 seconds researching modern liberalism without civil liberties coming up.
Civil liberties != individual freedom
They actually are more often than not antinomic.
No, it doesn't.
Though it overlaps with a common American use of “socialist” to mean anyone outside of the far-right. Most American “liberals” are center-right corporate capitalists, which is also the narrow sense of “liberal” in much of the world.
> In 2020, "liberals" in america have very little to do with the original meaning of the word which meant "in favor of freedom".
This is false, and even more than just being liberal in this vague sense, most American “liberals” and a great share of American “conservatives” are adherents to ideologies which evolved fairly directly from 18th century classical liberalism, differing largely in whether they view the immediate goals of 18th century liberals as having been terminal or steps in the direction of the desired goal.
We're pretty much in a double-speak world right now.
> Bitcoin draws libertarians... and HN is full of modern liberals.
It kinda sucks that there are no libertarian-ish forums with HN's intelligence level. Bitcointalk was this for a very, very short time (like, until 2012). I miss that.
Need to fit in is much more important to people than acknowledging the truth... mostly because the fear of being ostracized is one of the strongest and deepest human fears.
The only problem with downvotes is the rate limiting that HN applies to users who are frequently downvoted. Otherwise, I don't mind. I know these people are not downvoting me because they think I'm not adding to the discussion or violating guidelines or anything like that. It's precisely because I'm saying things they know is true but they have shadowed it in themselves and managed to convince themselves with other ideas just to try to fit in. So, when they see it out in the open, they feel very uncomfortable and want it to be hidden. I hope some of them will be inspired by by actions and see these things in themselves.