We all need a little more of this in our lives. NFT Market Collapses Just As Square Enix Sells Tomb Raider To Bet Big On Blockchain

[LukeTbk]

The internet became important because the traditional players took it over and integrated it into their existing playbooks.

Not sure about the chicken and egg nor the idea that the traditional players took it over.

The 25 Largest Internet Companies In The World​

Rank	Company	Industry	Revenue ($B)	Employees	Headquarters
1	Amazon	E-commerce	$107	268,908	Seattle, WA, USA
2	Google	Search	$74.98	61,814	Mountain View, California, USA
3	Facebook	Social	$17.93	12,691	Menlo Park, CA, USA
4	Tencent	Social	$15.84	25,517	Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
5	Alibaba	E-commerce	$12.29	26,000	Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
6	Baidu	Search	$10.56	41,467	Beijing, China
7	Priceline Group	Travel	$9.22	9,000	Norwalk, CT, USA
8	eBay	E-commerce	$8.59	34,600	San Jose, CA, USA
9	Netflix	Entertainment	$6.77	3,500	Los Gatos, CA, USA
10	Expedia,Inc.	Travel	$6.67	18,000	Bellevue, Washington, USA
11	Rakuten	E-commerce	$6.3	12,981	Tokyo, Japan
12	Salesforce.com	Cloud computing	$5.37	16,227	San Francisco, CA, USA
13	Yahoo	Search Engine	$4.97	12,500	Sunnyvale, CA, USA
14	ODIGEO	Travel	$4.9	1,700	Barcelona, Spain
15	NetEase	Online Services	$3.63	12,919	Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
16	Zalando	E-commerce	$3.28	10,000	Berlin, Germany
17	Groupon	E-commerce	$3.1	10,000	Chicago, Illinois, USA
18	LinkedIn	Social	$2.99	8,735	Mountain View, CA, USA
19	Twitter	Social	$2.22	3,638	San Francisco, CA, USA
20	Naver Corporation	Search engine	$2.2	2,501	Seoul, South Korea
21	Cimpress	Mass Customization	$1.78	8,000	Venlo, Netherlands
22	TripAdvisor	Travel	$1.5	2,793	Needham, Massachusetts,USA
23	flipkart	E-Commerce	$1.5	35,000	Bangalore, Karnataka, India
24	ASOS.com	E-Commerce	$1.40	7,500	London, UK
25	Yandex	Search	$0.9	5,514	Moscow, Russia

Some of the above are dot com survivor (amazon, yahoo, netflix, priceline, ebay), many are even more recent, some are now way bigger than the traditional player not only on the Internet but overall.

Considering how big Google/Amazon/Facebook/Netflix are on the Internet, is it really fair to say that the Internet was took over by the traditional player (I imagine we are thinking the Microsoft/IBM/Disney/Cisco/Hp-Dell of the world), they are big but took over ?

 

[ng4ever]

Not sure about the chicken and egg nor the idea that the traditional players took it over.

The 25 Largest Internet Companies In The World​

Rank	Company	Industry	Revenue ($B)	Employees	Headquarters
1	Amazon	E-commerce	$107	268,908	Seattle, WA, USA
2	Google	Search	$74.98	61,814	Mountain View, California, USA
3	Facebook	Social	$17.93	12,691	Menlo Park, CA, USA
4	Tencent	Social	$15.84	25,517	Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
5	Alibaba	E-commerce	$12.29	26,000	Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
6	Baidu	Search	$10.56	41,467	Beijing, China
7	Priceline Group	Travel	$9.22	9,000	Norwalk, CT, USA
8	eBay	E-commerce	$8.59	34,600	San Jose, CA, USA
9	Netflix	Entertainment	$6.77	3,500	Los Gatos, CA, USA
10	Expedia,Inc.	Travel	$6.67	18,000	Bellevue, Washington, USA
11	Rakuten	E-commerce	$6.3	12,981	Tokyo, Japan
12	Salesforce.com	Cloud computing	$5.37	16,227	San Francisco, CA, USA
13	Yahoo	Search Engine	$4.97	12,500	Sunnyvale, CA, USA
14	ODIGEO	Travel	$4.9	1,700	Barcelona, Spain
15	NetEase	Online Services	$3.63	12,919	Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
16	Zalando	E-commerce	$3.28	10,000	Berlin, Germany
17	Groupon	E-commerce	$3.1	10,000	Chicago, Illinois, USA
18	LinkedIn	Social	$2.99	8,735	Mountain View, CA, USA
19	Twitter	Social	$2.22	3,638	San Francisco, CA, USA
20	Naver Corporation	Search engine	$2.2	2,501	Seoul, South Korea
21	Cimpress	Mass Customization	$1.78	8,000	Venlo, Netherlands
22	TripAdvisor	Travel	$1.5	2,793	Needham, Massachusetts,USA
23	flipkart	E-Commerce	$1.5	35,000	Bangalore, Karnataka, India
24	ASOS.com	E-Commerce	$1.40	7,500	London, UK
25	Yandex	Search	$0.9	5,514	Moscow, Russia

Some of the above are dot com survivor (amazon, yahoo, priceline, ebay), many are even more recent, some are now way bigger than the traditional player not only on the Internet but overall.

Considering how big Google/Amazon/Facebook/Netflix are on the Internet, is it really fair to say that the Internet was took over by the traditional player (I imagine we are thinking the Microsoft/IBM/Disney/Cisco/Hp-Dell of the world), they are big but took over ?

I am surprised how big Netflix has gotten!

They could soon fall though.

Glad I suggested to them the idea of streaming all their content but they didn't do it totally. I know not their fault.

 

[ng4ever]

I wish I could of learned or start building PCs sense I was a baby or 1

The world is so different today then it was 10 years ago.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Not sure about the chicken and egg nor the idea that the traditional players took it over.

The 25 Largest Internet Companies In The World​

Rank	Company	Industry	Revenue ($B)	Employees	Headquarters
1	Amazon	E-commerce	$107	268,908	Seattle, WA, USA
2	Google	Search	$74.98	61,814	Mountain View, California, USA
3	Facebook	Social	$17.93	12,691	Menlo Park, CA, USA
4	Tencent	Social	$15.84	25,517	Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
5	Alibaba	E-commerce	$12.29	26,000	Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
6	Baidu	Search	$10.56	41,467	Beijing, China
7	Priceline Group	Travel	$9.22	9,000	Norwalk, CT, USA
8	eBay	E-commerce	$8.59	34,600	San Jose, CA, USA
9	Netflix	Entertainment	$6.77	3,500	Los Gatos, CA, USA
10	Expedia,Inc.	Travel	$6.67	18,000	Bellevue, Washington, USA
11	Rakuten	E-commerce	$6.3	12,981	Tokyo, Japan
12	Salesforce.com	Cloud computing	$5.37	16,227	San Francisco, CA, USA
13	Yahoo	Search Engine	$4.97	12,500	Sunnyvale, CA, USA
14	ODIGEO	Travel	$4.9	1,700	Barcelona, Spain
15	NetEase	Online Services	$3.63	12,919	Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
16	Zalando	E-commerce	$3.28	10,000	Berlin, Germany
17	Groupon	E-commerce	$3.1	10,000	Chicago, Illinois, USA
18	LinkedIn	Social	$2.99	8,735	Mountain View, CA, USA
19	Twitter	Social	$2.22	3,638	San Francisco, CA, USA
20	Naver Corporation	Search engine	$2.2	2,501	Seoul, South Korea
21	Cimpress	Mass Customization	$1.78	8,000	Venlo, Netherlands
22	TripAdvisor	Travel	$1.5	2,793	Needham, Massachusetts,USA
23	flipkart	E-Commerce	$1.5	35,000	Bangalore, Karnataka, India
24	ASOS.com	E-Commerce	$1.40	7,500	London, UK
25	Yandex	Search	$0.9	5,514	Moscow, Russia

Some of the above are dot com survivor (amazon, yahoo, priceline, ebay), many are even more recent, some are now way bigger than the traditional player not only on the Internet but overall.

Considering how big Google/Amazon/Facebook/Netflix are on the Internet, is it really fair to say that the Internet was took over by the traditional player (I imagine we are thinking the Microsoft/IBM/Disney/Cisco/Hp-Dell of the world), they are big but took over ?

By traditional players, I mean, traditional business investors focused on long term viable business models, not just on internet hype.

The dotcom survivors are the minority of companies back then who had a solid foundation to base their internet presence on.

Let's take Amazon as an example. Sure they were in the red for decades, but they had a solid plan. They weren't just on the internet to be on the internet. They were going to sell products. Books at first, but they grew beyond that, and they hired traditional logistics and warehousing experts in order to make that happen.

The ones that are new since the dotcom bubble burst learned the lesson that rather than just "being internet" they had to actually use that to provide value to a customer.

Right now there are a lot of companies (and individuals) who are "blockchain for the purpose of blockchain" and haven't figured out their fundamentals of what they are going to use it for in a way that provides value to a customer. These will not survive when the blockchain bubble bursts.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

In 2000 Robert J Shiller (of Case-Shiller Housing Index and Nobel Prize fame) released a book titled "Irrational Exuberance" in part about the recently passed Dotcom bubble bursting. The term was amusingly used by Alan Greenspan himself a speech in 1996 to describe the market at that time, and triggered a temporary 3% drop in Asian markets (which were still open at the time of his speech) almost instantly. Continued irrational exuberance seems to have forgotten this and the bubble continued to grow for a few more years before finally bursting.

But I digress...

In this book, Shiller defines "Irrational Exuberance" as follows:

Irrational exuberance is the psychological basis of a speculative bubble. I define a speculative bubble as a situation in which news of price increases spurs investor enthusiasm, which spreads by psychological contagion from person to person, in the process amplifying stories that might justify the price increases, and bringing in a larger and larger class of investors who, despite doubts about the real value of an investment, are drawn to it partly by envy of others' successes and partly through a gamblers' excitement.

I can't help but feel like this perfectly describes crypto (and NFT's) over the last several years, and I think people are finally starting to catch on.

 

[legcramp]

Just wanted to point how stupid this person is for not reading everything posted here. I said that NFT's don't solve social engineering and that's what a fishing attack is. Traditional hacking is too hard but people are easy. NFT's are no more secure than anything else we do.

Awwwww now you have to do personal attacks to prove your "point" lol

 

[DukenukemX]

Awwwww now you have to do personal attacks to prove your "point" lol

View attachment 476925

Nobody has made a case for NFT's or even blockchain. Majority of security issues are usually due to social engineering. If it can be circumvented from a fishing attack then NFT's solved nothing. You can still be hacked and can still have your stuff taken away. NFT's try to solve a problem that doesn't exist but still share the same problems like any other secure system. Everyone knows it's Seth Green's monkey. You know it, I know it, but apparently the blockchain can't prove it. We don't need more digital security, we need more social engineering security. BTW, that's not a personal attack.

 

[Red Falcon]

Nobody has made a case for NFT's or even blockchain. Majority of security issues are usually due to social engineering. If it can be circumvented from a fishing attack then NFT's solved nothing. You can still be hacked and can still have your stuff taken away. NFT's try to solve a problem that doesn't exist but still share the same problems like any other secure system. Everyone knows it's Seth Green's monkey. You know it, I know it, but apparently the blockchain can't prove it. We don't need more digital security, we need more social engineering security. BTW, that's not a personal attack.

Reminds me a bit of this:

 

[rinaldo00]

Seth Green lost his NFT apes to a phishing attack. How secure are NFT's again?

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahemerson/seth-green-bored-ape-stolen-tv-show

This is not about NFTs but if you fall for a phishing scam you were not hacked. No security in the world can save you if you give your keys to the thief.

 

[ng4ever]

This is not about NFTs but if you fall for a phishing scam you were not hacked. No security in the world can save you if you give your keys to the thief.

I laugh when people give their phone to people. Even if they are not logged in to anything.

 

[XenIneX]

This is not about NFTs but if you fall for a phishing scam you were not hacked. No security in the world can save you if you give your keys to the thief.

"Today, on a very special episode of Distinction Without a Difference..."

 

[DukenukemX]

This is not about NFTs but if you fall for a phishing scam you were not hacked. No security in the world can save you if you give your keys to the thief.

Instead of NFT's trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, then why not try to solve a problem that does? Every solution NFT's offer has been done better and more efficiently but social engineering is still a massive issue. This is why our phones ring constantly about vehicle warranty or why people from India with English names are trying to trick grandma by logging on her computer. If NFT's can't solve this then what good are they?

 

[blade52x]

Instead of NFT's trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, then why not try to solve a problem that does? Every solution NFT's offer has been done better and more efficiently but social engineering is still a massive issue. This is why our phones ring constantly about vehicle warranty or why people from India with English names are trying to trick grandma by logging on her computer. If NFT's can't solve this then what good are they?

They're called hardware wallets.

Unless someone breaks into your home and forces you to plug your in hardware wallet at gunpoint and force you to confirm your transaction through that wallet, no one can steal your NFTs or crypto. You can fully remote hijack my computer. You can even full on steal my personal identity. You're still not getting my crypto. Problem solved?

And a simple hardware + software wallet setup reduces risk about as far as it can get. Because the software wallet can act as a buffer from any malicious smart contracts from even attempting to pull funds or assets out of your hardware wallet. There's just multiple levels of "I accept" at this point, that you'd have to go through to actually be phished.

 

[XenIneX]

[...] malicious smart contracts [...] pull funds or assets out of your hardware wallet.

There's a sales pitch...


Explain to me again why I'd want-
Actually, no. Maybe try not to explain. Try really, really hard...

 

[DPI]

Are you guys still in this thread and talking in absolutes about something you dont fully understand and we cant possibly predict?

Like every trigger thread with either "bitcoin" or "nvidia" in the title. Casual observers or just people with an axe to grind using their keyboards as a therapy pillow that gets passed around the room.

Alas, when grandpa yells at the TV, let him. It's far less energy to just agree with people that are wrong.

 

[1_rick]

Unless someone breaks into your home and forces you to plug your in hardware wallet at gunpoint and force you to confirm your transaction through that wallet, no one can steal your NFTs or crypto.

 

[DukenukemX]

They're called hardware wallets.

Unless someone breaks into your home and forces you to plug your in hardware wallet at gunpoint and force you to confirm your transaction through that wallet, no one can steal your NFTs or crypto. You can fully remote hijack my computer. You can even full on steal my personal identity. You're still not getting my crypto. Problem solved?

So what about all the people losing their NFT's and crypto? They just stupid? One thing that needs to be understood about security is that it's very rare that the security system fails. It's almost always human error. We don't need more methods to secure data because we've had that working for decades. It's only a problem when someone doesn't update and patch vulnerabilities and they keep all their secure data in an unencrypted text file. Even the famous Linus Tech Tips fell for a phishing scam through an email. If NFT's are a method of verifying ownership and they can't thwart phishing scams then why do they even exist? In the situation with Linux Tech Tips they eventually got their money back because the bank was involved. Was anyone able to give back Seth Green's NFT's?

And a simple hardware + software wallet setup reduces risk about as far as it can get. Because the software wallet can act as a buffer from any malicious smart contracts from even attempting to pull funds or assets out of your hardware wallet. There's just multiple levels of "I accept" at this point, that you'd have to go through to actually be phished.

NFT's don't solve this problem of unlawful enrichment. Don't assume people are smart, because they aren't. If you watch the video of the person tricking a scammer, you'd see that their job is to convince you to pay. You're not going to think twice about the "I accept" button because like most people you're desensitized from them. It doesn't solve any problems. If we had an issue with securing our data like through people using zero day exploits or decrypting our online data then sure NFT's might help. But that isn't the problem at all. We have a social engineering problem, which is why we use two factor authentication and why you do Captcha to log in. Not because you got hacked but because someone has your credentials and can pretend to be you.

 

[LukeTbk]

Was anyone able to give back Seth Green's NFT's?

Some article:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahemerson/seth-green-bored-ape-stolen-tv-show

Almost sound like a scam to make NFT look stronger to the market that they are ?

stuff like:
threw a monkey wrench into the plan for his new animated series
a scruffy Bored Ape named Fred Simian, whose likeness and usage rights now belong to someone else.

Do they think the scammer would really go public and sue to enforce a copyright in this situation ? That they could find a judge/court that would care ?

One of the most explicit try to push NFT value / sensationalist:
Green no longer owns the commercial rights to the NFT and thus the show cannot move forward.

According to Green anyway (i.e. NFT is just a smoke show, everything is still like before):
Not true since the art was stolen. A buyer who purchased stolen art with real money and refuses to return it is not legally entitled to exploitation usage of the underlying IP.

If someone that "steal" and NFT does not gain anything, that the word court is still used, what all of this is/mean ?

 

[schoolslave]

---%<--- snip --->%---

If someone that "steal" and NFT does not gain anything, that the word court is still used, what all of this is/mean ?

It means exactly nothing because an NFT is nothing besides a way to pay money to someone else for nothing.
Owner of an NFT owns nothing and cannot do anything with the nothing besides sell it to some other moron.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

It means exactly nothing because an NFT is nothing besides a way to pay money to someone else for nothing.
Owner of an NFT owns nothing and cannot do anything with the nothing besides sell it to some other moron.

Exactly. NFT's codify nothing into law. They are not legally binding in any way shape or form.

A paper contract would be of much greater value. It at least has th epotential to be legally binding, so if you get screwed, you can seek redress in the courts.

 

[DukenukemX]

NFT insider trading. Again it's a social engineering problem which NFT's don't solve.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/opensea-employee-charged-with-insider-trading-nfts-2022-06-01/

 

[Andrew_Carr]

I'm just watching this and Bitcoin tanking and I'm pretty happy.

I'd just like to share this. It's an actual email I sent to my brother in 2013 about bitcoin crashing. The cycle has repeated many times since then. I agree that we go through various dotcom bubble type cycles where smart DEFI, NFTs, dog coins, etc. are the thing to gamble on and have crazy valuations, but out of each cycle you also have some winners/valid ideas. NFTs are 99% garbage URLs to jpegs hosted on centralized servers designed to sell art to people who want a feeling of ownership over something digital. But we do seem to be slowly creating better tools. I don't see NFTs being used in court to argue ownership of houses going mainstream really, but if you want to create an online presence not tied to real world governing bodies then people will probably find one or two good use cases for them.

You haven't eliminated it. You've multiplied it by 100,000x, put it on other folks systems, and cranked the CPU/GPU to 100% 24/7/365. As for the technologies: WORM filesystems, append-only databases, consensus based algorithms, etc. We've been doing this for 50 years. This is well understood technology - and it takes FAR less overhead, far fewer systems, is much more efficient, and currently (in general) much faster (especially compared to the BTC or ETH blockchains).

Oh, and there's not even a need for licenses. Open Source can handle pretty much any of this too.

Trustless, decentralized databases haven't been done for 50 years. Comparing centralized databases to decentralized databases is disingenuous. Trying to use blockchain for everything is equally stupid but to pretend that bitcoin wasn't a revolution in computer science is ridiculous. I'm not going to argue that blockchains are efficient, but a tangential benefit of consumer hardware based POW systems is some of the economic incentives they provide. Now that mining has become profitable enough we're seeing gas flaring used productively instead of wasted, powerplants mining to smooth out loads (which could help with transitioning to unpredictable wind/solar energy), and additional economic incentives for cheap energy production (typically renewable) and better computer hardware.

 

[lopoetve]

I'd just like to share this. It's an actual email I sent to my brother in 2013 about bitcoin crashing. The cycle has repeated many times since then. I agree that we go through various dotcom bubble type cycles where smart DEFI, NFTs, dog coins, etc. are the thing to gamble on and have crazy valuations, but out of each cycle you also have some winners/valid ideas. NFTs are 99% garbage URLs to jpegs hosted on centralized servers designed to sell art to people who want a feeling of ownership over something digital. But we do seem to be slowly creating better tools. I don't see NFTs being used in court to argue ownership of houses going mainstream really, but if you want to create an online presence not tied to real world governing bodies then people will probably find one or two good use cases for them.

Sure, but those can disappear any time the guys running the game / event / world / whatever feel like deleting it. Digital assets are... well, not really assets.

Trustless, decentralized databases haven't been done for 50 years.

No, because there hasn't been a valid use for them in 50 years; and I'd argue that we've proven here that there still isn't a valid use for them. Not saying there won't be, but jpeg apes ain't it.

Comparing centralized databases to decentralized databases is disingenuous.

Solution to non-solution. He gave me an objective to solve, I showed how we've solved it for decades. Picking a tool instead of a problem to solve is exactly what I said at first - NFTs and blockchain are a solution looking for a problem, rather than a solution TO a problem.

Trying to use blockchain for everything is equally stupid but to pretend that bitcoin wasn't a revolution in computer science is ridiculous. I'm not going to argue that blockchains are efficient, but a tangential benefit of consumer hardware based POW systems is some of the economic incentives they provide. Now that mining has become profitable enough we're seeing gas flaring used productively instead of wasted, powerplants mining to smooth out loads (which could help with transitioning to unpredictable wind/solar energy), and additional economic incentives for cheap energy production (typically renewable) and better computer hardware.

Sure. It's a neat science project. Hence the graph I had earlier - we're rapidly sliding down the trough of disillusionment and eventually they'll find some real uses for them - whatever those may be - but it almost certainly ain't the aforementioned apes, or even fake money.

As for the rest - we don't need to be burning MORE energy to solve those problems. Heat is heat, energy wasted creates heat, etc etc etc. There's no valid reason right now to burn energy for fun to "mine" other than to try and ride the scheme till it crashes. But that's treading into soapbox climate change discussions/etc.

 

[ElementDave]

It means exactly nothing because an NFT is nothing besides a way to pay money to someone else for nothing.
Owner of an NFT owns nothing and cannot do anything with the nothing besides sell it to some other moron.

That's probably the best characterization of NFTs I've seen. Succinct, yet doesn't omit any important details.

NFTs in one word:

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

...aand with Bitcoin below $24k Binance and Celsius have halted withdrawals in order to prevent some sort of "run on the banks".

Wouldn't it be hilarious if it turns out they don't actually have customers bitcoins?

So much for "trading is so much better and more free when the government isn't involved" only to have the two largest bitcoin exchanges halt trading instead

I don't know if this is the end of the crypto-bubble or not, but if it is, the sad part is that the true criminals already cashed out, leaving the suckers who got into crypto out of FOMO holding the bag.

 

[LukeTbk]

...aand with Bitcoin below $24k Binance and Celsius have halted withdrawals in order to prevent some sort of "run on the banks".

That sentence in some article about it:

• Skyrocketing inflation and cost of living prices have destroyed the market

Is so counter-intuitive.

Gold:

How could inflation possibly hurt in any way the bitcoin market.

Looking a bit on Celsius:
It allows you to earn up to 17% APY when you choose to hold your crypto on the platform
For borrowing, the interest rates are as low as 1% APR

Have we ever saw a bank giving more in interest that it charge for a loan before ? By a giant amount ?

Why would someone not immediadly take a giant loan at 1% to put it right back at 17% ?

Seem to me:
The one thing that makes Celsius Network different from any other project is that their mission is to use only 20% of their revenue to pay for everything they need to run the business. Despite giving back 80% of their revenue Celsius Network is a profitable company. Pretty sweet, isn't it?
When you deposit your cryptocurrency with Celsius, it goes directly into a pool of the same asset. They lend that money to financial institutions and collect interests from them. This is how Celsius Network revenue is generated.


The revenues does not seem to come from crypto lending and I would imagine for it to make sense versus the Celsius user just lending money to financial institutions themselfs, the model was build on thinking that between the user lending money to Celsius to them selling it to use the cash to invest that the crypto value would have went up. I could be 100% wrong, but otherwise I do not see what the crypto is used for in their scenario at all.

 

[Lakados]

...aand with Bitcoin below $24k Binance and Celsius have halted withdrawals in order to prevent some sort of "run on the banks".

Wouldn't it be hilarious if it turns out they don't actually have customers bitcoins?

So much for "trading is so much better and more free when the government isn't involved" only to have the two largest bitcoin exchanges halt trading instead

I don't know if this is the end of the crypto-bubble or not, but if it is, the sad part is that the true criminals already cashed out, leaving the suckers who got into crypto out of FOMO holding the bag.

Of all the value of Bitcoin supposedly there is cash to cover less than 10% of it. If there is a run on it things get pretty bleak pretty fast.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Of all the value of Bitcoin supposedly there is cash to cover less than 10% of it. If there is a run on it things get pretty bleak pretty fast.

Well, I'd imagine it would behave like any other security, in that if you want to sell it, someone else has to buy it, so the value of bitcoins would adjust downward pretty rapidly in that scenario to the point where the value of bitcoin hits parity with the cash that is willing to buy it

 

[lopoetve]

That sentence in some article about it:

• Skyrocketing inflation and cost of living prices have destroyed the market

Is so counter-intuitive.

because it's bullshit. Literally.

Gold:
View attachment 482688

How could inflation possibly hurt in any way the bitcoin market.

It shouldn't; it only is because this is a ponzi scheme and now the middle layers need cash to pay bills, so they're getting out - which tells you all you need to know about the market as a whole. It's a fucking joke.

Looking a bit on Celsius:
It allows you to earn up to 17% APY when you choose to hold your crypto on the platform
For borrowing, the interest rates are as low as 1% APR

Have we ever saw a bank giving more in interest that it charge for a loan before ? By a giant amount ?

Nope, for good, EXTREMELY BASIC economic reasons. Like econ 101 level shit here.

Why would someone now immediadly take a giant lown a 1% to put it right back at 17% ?

Because it's a ponzi scheme! I guarantee folks did though. FAKE money baby!

Seem to me:
The one thing that makes Celsius Network different from any other project is that their mission is to use only 20% of their revenue to pay for everything they need to run the business. Despite giving back 80% of their revenue Celsius Network is a profitable company. Pretty sweet, isn't it?
When you deposit your cryptocurrency with Celsius, it goes directly into a pool of the same asset. They lend that money to financial institutions and collect interests from them. This is how Celsius Network revenue is generated.

Can't really beat prime then. Or you shouldn't - if you do, they're giving you fake money.

The revenues does not seem to come from crypto lending and I would imagine for it to make sense versus the Celsius user just lending money to financial institutions themselfs, the model was build on thinking that between the user lending money to Celsius to them selling it to use the cash to invest that the crypto value would have went up. I could be 100% wrong, but otherwise I do not see what the crypto is used for in their scenario at all.

~waves arms wildly~

Well, I'd imagine it would behave like any other security, in that if you want to sell it, someone else has to buy it, so the value of bitcoins would adjust downward pretty rapidly in that scenario to the point where the value of bitcoin hits parity with the cash that is willing to buy it

Ayup. Or 0. That also happens

Also, anyone want to buy a tulip plant?

 

[Red Falcon]

You'll hate your own ignorance reading back on this in a few years, that's all I can say.

I think you might hate your own ignorance reading back on this now, only a few weeks later.
Too bad we all didn't invest in worthless NFTs, which ironically are now even more worthless.

 

[blade52x]

I'm glad you didn't invest in NFTs to have crashed in value. I've also never suggested anyone invest in any NFTs, in this thread, or any where on this forum, ever.

My statement of ignorance refers to the short sighted view, narrow-minded thinking, or just trying to be a part of the mob to cope on what's already missed as the reasons why you'll miss out on yet more opportunities to come. But hey, cheerlead on just like you all did in 2014, 2018, and now in 2022. That's worked out well.

You can keep doing what's worked for you, while I'll keep looking into what uniquely identifiable bytes of information stored on a blockchain (and not just any, but one that's validated and secured by thousands of nodes) might actually be useful for and whether or not challenges presented by blockchain prohibit those use cases. As I've already stated the JPEG use case is stupid, but it did prove a more general use case for the NFT - not just ownership but one that's easily transferable to other users. And while others may argue other tech that can do the same thing exists - the open p2p networks that run on top of that tech don't.

 

[Armenius]

...aand with Bitcoin below $24k Binance and Celsius have halted withdrawals in order to prevent some sort of "run on the banks".

Wouldn't it be hilarious if it turns out they don't actually have customers bitcoins?

So much for "trading is so much better and more free when the government isn't involved" only to have the two largest bitcoin exchanges halt trading instead

I don't know if this is the end of the crypto-bubble or not, but if it is, the sad part is that the true criminals already cashed out, leaving the suckers who got into crypto out of FOMO holding the bag.

It's hilarious seeing this when the cryptocurrency faithful want to replace fiat currency. The US dollar is down 7.6% over the past 12 months while Bitcoin has plummeted 44.2% in the same timeframe. Why would nobody want to depend on cryptocurrency with a track record like that, I wonder?

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Heh,

Coinbase just laid off 1000 people, some 18% of its people, with the CEO warning of a "crypto winter"

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/coinbase-to-layoff-18-of-its-employees

I'll take a "crypto winter", but I'd prefer a "crypto end".

 

[OutOfPhase]

I really wish we could just attach this into proof-of-work for useful studies, like protein folding. Heck, SETI. Anything useful for society.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I really wish we could just attach this into proof-of-work for useful studies, like protein folding. Heck, SETI. Anything useful for society.

At this point I am thinking that the most useful thing to do would be to simply stop consuming all the power that goes into this, as well as other massively distributed computing projects, and give our power grid and generation some relief. It's a massive waste of resources, and massively contributes to global greenhouse gasses.

I think you are right, that this could be spent on something better, but maybe it is even better if it is not spent at all.

 

[serpretetsky]

I really wish we could just attach this into proof-of-work for useful studies, like protein folding. Heck, SETI. Anything useful for society.

Just started googling for "proof of useful work"




Don't know anything about it or how scalable / secure it can be. Would be kinda cool if it works.

edit: huh, the forums converted the link to a "media" link. Now I feel like I'm advertising when I really just wanted a simple text link . Just to be clear
!!! I DO NOT SUPPORT AND AM NOT AFFILIATED WITH FLUX (BLOCKCHAIN) !!!

 

[OutOfPhase]

At this point I am thinking that the most useful thing to do would be to simply stop consuming all the power that goes into this, as well as other massively distributed computing projects, and give our power grid and generation some relief. It's a massive waste of resources, and massively contributes to global greenhouse gasses.

I think you are right, that this could be spent on something better, but maybe it is even better if it is not spent at all.

It's harm reduction. I too would prefer we not use finite resources generating magic numbers, but if we insist upon that, I'd like to find a way to get something, anything, out of it.

 

[That_Sound_Guy]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/15/tech/bill-gates-crypto-nfts-comments/index.html

Well now it's official, Crypto and NFT's are a scam. Ol Bill says so.

When did he become the defacto standard for input on various topics from "news" outlets. Of all the cancel culture bullshit in this world, he survives it.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/15/tech/bill-gates-crypto-nfts-comments/index.html

Well now it's official, Crypto and NFT's are a scam. Ol Bill says so.

When did he become the defacto standard for input on various topics from "news" outlets. Of all the cancel culture bullshit in this world, he survives it.

I mean, he has been an influential voice in tech for 40 years, so it should make sense that if he speaks on a topic, it gets some attention. That said, he hasn't been the chairman of Microsoft since 2014, so he is not quite the authority in the industry as he once was.

Still, if he has a strong opinion like this, just based on who he is and his past with Microsoft, of course it is news.

 

[erek]

I mean, he has been an influential voice in tech for 40 years, so it should make sense that if he speaks on a topic, it gets some attention. That said, he hasn't been the chairman of Microsoft since 2014, so he is not quite the authority in the industry as he once was.

Still, if he has a strong opinion like this, just based on who he is and his past with Microsoft, of course it is news.

Crypto currency is going to be a part of the future no matter what, just wish it wasn’t based on cryptographic mechanics