[dartos]

I’m not against crypto as a technology, but as a financial tool, how is it not a greater fools game?

Broadly speaking, you can’t live on crypto alone. Most people aren’t able to buy food and shelter with it.

So the goal, in those majority of cases, is to buy in low for the exact purpose of waiting for a “greater fool” to purchase it from you for more.

[eaurouge]

> Broadly speaking, you can’t live on commodities alone. Most people aren’t able to buy food and shelter with it.

> So the goal, in those majority of cases, is to buy in low for the exact purpose of waiting for a “greater fool” to purchase it from you for more.

Feel free to substitute with your preferred non-monetary asset.

[dartos]

Not _any_. I can live in a house while it appreciates.

I can take dividends (in dollars) from certain stocks.

But not crypto (or non dividend stocks)

I’d argue that stocks without dividends are also a greater fool’s game.

But back to the original point, so you agree that crypto is a greater fools game, financially.

[tough]

there's plenty of offramps and onramps from crypto to trad finance.

You can earn your money on crypto, get a debit card, and pay for your food and rent with it.

I've done it.

[dartos]

Sure, but that’s my point exactly.

You need an offramp.

The only offramp is someone else (or some exchange) buying your crypto.

They would be the “greater fool” in this case.

Even if you earn crypto, that crypto came from a “lesser fool.”

You’re just the intermediary.

[fbrusch]

ether, Ethereum's native token, is required to pay for computation on a computer with peculiar properties (publicly visible, unmodifiable, unstoppable code, uncensorable interaction). If somebody finds that useful, he will need ethers, and you will be able to sell them yours. How would he be a (greater) fool?

[dartos]

This is true in the case of chains that have vms built in, (Not bitcoin, Monero, meme shitcoins) but being “gas” for vms isn’t “inherent” to crypto.

On a kind unrelated note, are there any compelling dapps on eth that aren’t financial tools?

When I was playing around with web3 and dapps in 2020 it seemed like the only dapps around were banking protocols and gambling.

[tough]

farcaster

[eaurouge]

> Sure, but that’s my point exactly.

> You need an offramp.

> The only offramp is someone else (or some exchange) buying your stocks.

> They would be the “greater fool” in this case.

> Even if you earn stocks, that stock came from a “lesser fool.”

> You’re just the intermediary.

[LegionMammal978]

> The only offramp is someone else (or some exchange) buying your stocks.

So dividends, buybacks, and takeovers don't exist?

[dartos]

FYI saying that someone else is also a greater fools game, doesn’t do anything to show that crypto isn’t.

[tough]

> Sure, but that’s my point exactly. > You need an offramp.

> The only offramp is someone else (or some exchange) buying your fiat.

> They would be the “greater fool” in this case.

> Even if you earn stocks, that stock came from a “lesser fool.”

> You’re just the intermediary.

[dartos]

That’s just not true.

I can purchase food and shelter directly with fiat. (There may be some areas where crypto can do that too, but it’s far from the norm)

That’s not a merchant “buying” my money with other representations of wealth, that’s me purchasing food and shelter. Framing it like that is a bad faith argument.

And yeah, I’d say stocks without dividends is also a greater fool’s game.

[mkatx]

No one buys stocks for the hell of it, it is 100% a financial instrument used to profit by the buyer and the seller. If you couldn't sell to someone for a higher price, no one would buy them. If that's your bar, then cryptocurrencies are as legit as stocks as far as a financial tool is concerned. Stocks may arguably have more utility, but for the buyers/sellers, they aren't much more that a speculation instrument.

If someone will take Pokemon cards for a pizza, or a house, whatever, then it has some utility. If someone collects pokemon cards, and has enough for a house, they might (probably) need to exchange them for some real currency to complete that transaction. But pokemon cards are not inherently a scam.. just because the price can go up and down.. they are probably considered a collectable.

Now cryptocurrencies are not collectibles, and they are not currencies, but they have attributes of both I'd propose. They are entirely speculatory in nature, but can sometimes be used as a currency. So, in some ways, I argue, they should be treated like pokemon cards, in other ways, regarding regulation, they might need to be considered a currency to be able to regulate the industry in such a way that protects investors, just like private transactions (selling collectibles) and financial investing (trading stocks/etc) have regulations.

Although this is nuanced, and cryptocurrency is not currency or a collectible entirely, it is not inherently a 'greaters fools game' any more than trading stocks or Pokemon cards.

It's just another thing that needs to be regulated, and if people didn't use it for something, it would just go away, and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[dartos]

So then crypto, as a financial asset, is a greater fool’s game.

OP said it’s inherently not, which is what I was arguing against.

[mkatx]

On another note, there is a lot of fud on cryptocurrency right now.. and let me say this.. there are farms of individuals, soon to be llm's, flooding the Internet with all this negativity on crypto in every conceivable public forum.

100%, this is politics now, when you see people online with a certain perspective, you tend to at least consider it. This is the psychology of influence on the net, everyone's brains are connected to this same network, and business and government know it. If they can even suggest that individuals give any credence to a random post online, they will make that post, and to their ends. So now, we have entire buildings of people filling the net with their 'opinions', in the name of influencing.

There are so many 'people' online that totally call cryptocurrency an inherit scam (which is pretty much impossible, inherently so, that the idea is itself a scam, and not just able to be used to scam.. cmon, the distinction is there), that I'm convinced that many of the anticrypto posts are simple persuasion,because either the riches want to buy in, or they are scared of what it can do (as far as replacing the status quo).

Now I'm sure I'm that crazy internet crypto dude all of a sudden, but listen closely, cause we will all see in the next decade or two, and neither you nor me know the future. Remember me either way. :)

[spankalee]

I think crypto is inherently a scam - a distributed pyramid scheme. Am I now "people" with "opinions"?

[mkatx]

But seriously, there are 1000's of cryptocurencies, you can't logic the possibility that even one was built with 'non-scammy' intentions? Cause 1 is all it takes to refute that 'ceyotocurrencies are inherently a scam'.

I'm sure your being vacecious, but there are those that would comment that seriously.

[spankalee]

Yes, I think digital scarcity is a scam.

But that's not really the point. You seem to think that I can't really exist and any "person" with such an "opinion" is a part of a propaganda operation or trying somehow to artificially lower the price (with a post!) to buy in.

Can you accept that real people think crypto is a scam?

[mkatx]

Happily, I really appreciate your opinion, your part of the conversation.

I said "There are so many 'people' online", implying that there is a lot of propaganda being passed off as opinion. How much? How real? Well, I was giving my opinion on that.

I'm not saying that YOU are this propaganda, but challenging you to defend your point helps to fight, and weed out, the propaganda I'm talking about. Sounds like you might have read it?

[daveguy]

Whether a crypto is built with non-scammy intentions has little bearing on whether it is used as the vehicle for scams. And a permanent, uncorrectable ledger as the sole truth of transfer of funds is perfect for scams.

[mkatx]

"Whether a crypto is built with non-scammy intentions has little bearing on whether it is used as the vehicle for scams."

Many things can be used as a vehicle to scam to varying degrees, to say that cryptocurrency is inherently a scam in and of itself, is not accurate, as it certainly has non-scam use cases, just like non-cryptocurrencies.

I'm happy to debate, but I don't think either of us are wrong so far, as what you said and what I said are both not mutually exclusive. But if you are asserting that cryptocurrency is in and of itself a scam, I'm happy to have a healthy debate.

[dartos]

I’m sure that somewhere in crypto land there are people really trying to show the good crypto can bring.

I’m sure a fair amount of them get screwed over by bad actors.

But it’s undeniable that the most successful strategy (at least in terms of gaining popularity) is making a pyramid scheme, but automated.

That may say something more about humans than crypto, but it is what it is.

[mkatx]

Fo sho, yes.

Also, I like how you trim your front sail (cut if your jib), we should be friends.

Edit: autocorrect