Cryptocurrency as the next significant stage for computing technology, not just an investment

[Hugh Mughnus]

thank you comrade for this introspective look into comrade marx

[Alcofribas]

yeah zeff, it was just ambiguous in the first post now it’s more clear. 

[chenGOD]

3 hours ago, Alcofribas said:

He edited it lol

I’d rather know your musk, if you catch my drift :docking emoji:

[Alcofribas]

9 minutes ago, chenGOD said:

I’d rather know your musk, if you catch my drift :docking emoji:

mods please come pick me up

[chim]

5 hours ago, pcock said:

And this is why you set trailing stop losses on volatile non-option trades/gambles. I haven't set mine yet though. Anything under 115 for GME seems to be the accepted low point for shorters to be able to exit their positions. Once it hits that it will crumble back to sub-10 in an instant.

 

Setting stop losses on this level of volatility is licking the tip with money you shouldn't have sunk into it. Half of the ladder short strategy is to trigger stop losses (the other half is panic selling). Banking on a $1000/share pipe dream is one thing but a long tactic based on the continued short interest and tens of millions of ITM calls expiring has a certain logic (and a ton of risk). The red squiggly line is part of the fun. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by chim

[pcock]

2 hours ago, chim said:

Setting stop losses on this level of volatility is licking the tip with money you shouldn't have sunk into it. Half of the ladder short strategy is to trigger stop losses (the other half is panic selling). Banking on a $1000/share pipe dream is one thing but a long tactic based on the continued short interest and tens of millions of ITM calls expiring has a certain logic (and a ton of risk). The red squiggly line is part of the fun. 

I shouldn't have put any money into this in the first place as a smart trader, but its riled up my innate love of mild chaos and revolution, and I'd prefer to lose a few hundred bucks than sit on the sidelines. I have set a stop loss for 120 though, all well and good having some fun but mayaswell be prudent.

[brian trageskin]

7 hours ago, chenGOD said:

You should see WallStreetBets!

but I agree with you. It’s like how in the 90’s for a brief period, white people started listening to Wu-tang and suddenly thought it was ok to use the n word, with or without the “hard r”. 

he was trolling though. you got trolled by a troll, chen. he's not the promoter of respect and tolerance you believe he is. if it's any consolation i too fell for it

[dingformung]

1 hour ago, brian trageskin said:

he was trolling though. you got trolled by a troll, chen. he's not the promoter of respect and tolerance you believe he is. if it's any consolation i too fell for it

Are you daft? It seems you are incapable of any nuance. One can be serious about a thing but at the same time exaggerate the intensity of one's statement about said thing to add ambiguity (I don't insult my fellow WATMMers by assuming they wouldn't understand that). Whether you want to call that trolling or not is your choice. I know you are the type that constantly complains about "pc" (though thanks to your incoherence I'm still not sure whether you mean "Piña Colada" or "political correctness") and that is probably a result of you longing for the tender touch of a woman, but please be a bit more considerate towards the rest of us and spare us your unhelpful comments.

[chenGOD]

1 hour ago, brian trageskin said:

he was trolling though. you got trolled by a troll, chen. he's not the promoter of respect and tolerance you believe he is. if it's any consolation i too fell for it

Lol what? He’s not trolling. He’s using a bit of humour to prove a point. 

[dcom]

Quote

New digital currencies like bitcoin are neither a threat or an opportunity. They do not raise any interesting economic questions and do not pose any significant policy problems. They do not represent any kind of technological advance on existing payment systems, which are of course already digital. They are just another asset bubble, based on the usual mix of fraud and fantasy. By historical standards, they are not a very large or threatening bubble. There is nothing important about them at all.

Money and Cryptocurrencies (J.W.Mason)

[brian trageskin]

i'm totally arguing against piña colada

i still don't get what you were saying but i can't be bothered to read those posts again. anyway i'll shut up lol

[Berk]

Spoiler

See you on the moon boys!

 

Edited January 30, 2021 by Berk

[zlemflolia]

53 minutes ago, dcom said:

Money and Cryptocurrencies (J.W.Mason)

this article is a lot of words to deny the fact that you can rent apartments and buy houses and cars with bitcoin, you just have to search a bit more for specific dealers.  claims that its not interacting with existing financial systems in the way you'd expect money to do if it spawned from that system doesnt mean its not money, and the fact that it doesnt is its main good aspect.  it allows you to do things you couldnt do before, thats all you need, even if it's as seemingly trivial as buying drugs

Edited January 30, 2021 by cyanobacteria

[auxien]

3 hours ago, dcom said:

Money and Cryptocurrencies (J.W.Mason)

Quote

And yet here we are talking about cryptocurrencies. Why?

Partly it’s just hard money crankery and libertarianism, which have a outsized voice in economics discussions. And partly it’s testimony to the success of their marketing machine. One might say that the only thing that stands behind that $200 billion value, is the existence of conversations like this one.

 

2 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

this article is a lot of words to deny the fact that you can rent apartments and buy houses and cars with bitcoin, you just have to search a bit more for specific dealers.  claims that its not interacting with existing financial systems in the way you'd expect money to do if it spawned from that system doesnt mean its not money, and the fact that it doesnt is its main good aspect.  it allows you to do things you couldnt do before, thats all you need, even if it's as seemingly trivial as buying drugs

i mean this sincerely, no harshness or unkindness at all. i sincerely think you missed the point of the article. you're not entirely wrong in what you're saying but also you didn't do yourself any service by ignoring the point(s) in it.

[zlemflolia]

14 minutes ago, auxien said:

 

i mean this sincerely, no harshness or unkindness at all. i sincerely think you missed the point of the article. you're not entirely wrong in what you're saying but also you didn't do yourself any service by ignoring the point(s) in it.

money under capitalism is not just some liquid being added to markets to make them produce commodities and services.  it gives people direct access as individuals.  these abstract models are so divorced from reality its hard to imagine justifying it

[hijexx]

5 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

this article is a lot of words to deny the fact that you can rent apartments and buy houses and cars with bitcoin, you just have to search a bit more for specific dealers.

lol

Good luck finding a landlord that accepts Bitcoin

Even if you do, they will almost certainly require that the BTC be denominated in currency that has value in parity with whatever obligations they have to meet. At the least that would be property taxes.

[JS20]

18 hours ago, chenGOD said:

You should see WallStreetBets!

but I agree with you. It’s like how in the 90’s for a brief period, white people started listening to Wu-tang and suddenly thought it was ok to use the n word, with or without the “hard r”. 

Anyone can say any word they like, pronounced however they wish.

https://techcrunch.com/2021/01/30/india-plans-to-introduce-law-to-ban-bitcoin-other-private-cryptocurrencies/?guccounter=1

 

Blockchain has utilitarian value. Bitcoin is as worthless at Dogecoin at the end of the day.

Edited January 30, 2021 by JS20

[chenGOD]

12 minutes ago, JS20 said:

Anyone can say any word they like, pronounced however they wish.

https://techcrunch.com/2021/01/30/india-plans-to-introduce-law-to-ban-bitcoin-other-private-cryptocurrencies/?guccounter=1

 

Blockchain has utilitarian value. Bitcoin is as worthless at Dogecoin at the end of the day.

Not on here mate. 
 

lol banning Bitcoin is like trying to squeeze air with your bare hands. 

[zlemflolia]

6 hours ago, JS20 said:

Anyone can say any word they like, pronounced however they wish.

https://techcrunch.com/2021/01/30/india-plans-to-introduce-law-to-ban-bitcoin-other-private-cryptocurrencies/?guccounter=1

 

Blockchain has utilitarian value. Bitcoin is as worthless at Dogecoin at the end of the day.

thats clearly not the case if you look even at trivial metrics like at market cap

[zlemflolia]

I'd encourage anyone interested to read "Cryptocommunism" by Mark Alizart

https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Cryptocommunism-p-9781509538584

It combines various economic ideas into making the case that Bitcoin is the most revolutionary technology invented and unbeknownst to Marx reformulates money in a way that allows it to be the very social technology necessary to implement communism rather than being equivalent to previous monetary technologies which he wished to abolish.  It's a left wing oriented book but it isn't hardline communist and takes ideas from various capitalist ideas like MMT

There were quite a few of what I would call factual errors, it could have used a few more editors, but they can be overlooked

Edited February 1, 2021 by cyanobacteria

[Limo]

4 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

There were quite a few of what I would call factual errors

Such as the one where it calls Bitcoin the most revolutionary technology ever invented.

 

 

[Cryptowen]

"hey uh Jimmie, when, uh, yuh do yuh show tonite, see if yuh can hit those fuckin invesss-tuhs, maybe ruffim up witchuh jokes a bit"

[dingformung]

7 hours ago, cyanobacteria said:

I'd encourage anyone interested to read "Cryptocommunism" by Mark Alizart

https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Cryptocommunism-p-9781509538584

It combines various economic ideas into making the case that Bitcoin is the most revolutionary technology invented and unbeknownst to Marx reformulates money in a way that allows it to be the very social technology necessary to implement communism rather than being equivalent to previous monetary technologies which he wished to abolish.  It's a left wing oriented book but it isn't hardline communist and takes ideas from various capitalist ideas like MMT

There were quite a few of what I would call factual errors, it could have used a few more editors, but they can be overlooked

Weird usage of the prefix "crypto-", imo. Usually when in combination with a political ideology it means that this ideology is hidden, e.g. crypto-facism, crypto-stalinism, etc, not that it has to do with cryptocurrency (or is it meant as a play on words?). The description of the book reads pretty biased and it seems like they quoted Marx and Engels only for the sake of quoting Marx and Engels, not because it helps making a point. Did you read it? What strategy to use Bitcoin as a means to install communism is laid out in the book, in short words?

[dcom]

46 minutes ago, dingformung said:

Weird usage of the prefix "crypto-", imo.

If you think about it, cryptocurrency is a misnomer, too: as you wrote, the crypto- prefix means secret, hidden; e.g. cryptography, secret writing - cryptocurrencies by default are not secret, as the ledger is designed to be very public indeed, touted as one of the selling points. One could also argue that the standard definition of currency doesn't apply to them either, making cryptocurrency a misnomer twice over. Colloquially referring to them as "crypto" is also misleading. Sure, they use cryptographical technologies, but it's still a misnomer to me.

[chenGOD]

29 minutes ago, dcom said:

If you think about it, cryptocurrency is a misnomer, too: as you wrote, the crypto- prefix means secret, hidden; e.g. cryptography, secret writing - cryptocurrencies by default are not secret, as the ledger is designed to be very public indeed, touted as one of the selling points. One could also argue that the standard definition of currency doesn't apply to them either, making cryptocurrency a misnomer twice over. Colloquially referring to them as "crypto" is also misleading. Sure, they use cryptographical technologies, but it's still a misnomer to me.

There are some where the crypto prefix is applicable, (Monero, Zcash, and Dash are the three biggest "privacy coins" I believe), but yes on the whole the better description is "virtual assets".