From the (middle of the) story: The reason CES was so packed with random “AI”-branded products was that sticking those two letters to a new company is seen as something of a talisman, a ritual to bring back the (VC) rainy season.
From the (middle of the) story: The reason CES was so packed with random “AI”-branded products was that sticking those two letters to a new company is seen as something of a talisman, a ritual to bring back the (VC) rainy season.
What do you mean “fiasco”? Out of just 23,000 different cryptocoins, over 8,000 are still getting traded, just yesterday I saw a documentary about a sect using their own cryptocoin to pay its members for peddling ayahuasca and other psychedelics, there still are “crypto training camps” where teenagers get in debt to live all in a single room eating noodles, and the other day I got a call from the “Europe Blockchain Central” asking for a seed to unlock my funds… 🥳
Those are just the “idea guys” looking for a “technological partner” to kickstart the next disruptive… yeah, I’ve heard the pitch too many times. Then again, if I had spent the time to mine just a few hundred BTC back when I first heard of them, I’d now be a millionaire 🤷
Finally! A use case!
If I had lived in the 17th century it would have been very profitable to get involved in witch trials and witch hunting. But being profitable doesn’t make it any less wrong.
Or maybe you could get in on the Dutch flower bubble, which was around then I think.
If you were part of the Spanish Inquisition, pretty much all of the witch trials ended up dismissed or with the accusing side getting punished… for holding a heretic belief in witchcraft. Not particularly wrong, if you ask me.
Similarly, nobody forces people to pay for BTC, unlike for example the US going around the world with a “you will accept USD and like it… or else”. One is worse than the other, but it isn’t Bitcoin.
That is not an accurate description of witch hunting and witch trials. It was a distinct business that emerged from capitalism and misinformation, in which the properties of women could be stolen for profit. Witch hunters would travel from town to town looking for vulnerable women to legally rob and kill, and those that testified they’d witnessed withcraft got a cut of the profit too. As a result of this practice tens of thousands of women were killed. Carl Sagan dedicated an excellent chapter of his book Demon-Haunted World to the topic, if you’re interested.
Anyway, that is a bit of a side bar to the point you’re missing. Just as it would once have been very profitable but deeply unethical to be a witch hunter, crypto was certainly profitable at a time but only in deeply unethical ways. The late crypto fad was little more an MLM scheme rife with fraud, and any profit extracted was at the expense of whoever is holding the hot potato when the worthless tulip market crashes (if you’ll excuse the mixed metaphor…).
That is not an accurate description either.
Witch trials have varied a lot from place to place: the French and the German were particularly willing to kill women for it, with England and America getting on the fad, not so much in other places. In particular in Spain, they liked to kill for “heresy”, so claiming that witchcraft existed was a worse crime than getting accused of being a witch. Stealing “the properties of women” is BS, since back then women had no right to ownership; most anyone could steal would be some clothes, and the occasional piece of jewelry.
Crypto, works the same as any other asset: it has value as long as people believe it has value.
It doesn’t work exactly like the USD, where denying USD’s value puts you on the wrong end of US’s army, and Bitcoin has a fixed limited supply, unlike the US being able to increase supply indefinitely, but otherwise the basics are the same.
Can’t really excuse the mix of metaphors, since they’re vastly different:
This is patently false on several fronts. Crypto is as profitable as USD: scams are highly profitable, speculation can be profitable, holding it is as profitable as the growth in demand.
You don’t need to scam anyone to get a profit… but claiming that Mar-a-Lago makes you a billionaire while being valued at $18M, can make you president 🤷
That is not quite right. Married women had no property. Plenty of unmarried women had property, and with-hunting was a for-profit legalised industry of robbing these vulnerable women. But European history isn’t really the point so let’s move on.
I don’t think your description of a tulip market is quite right. The point of the tulip market is just that the tulip itself has no inherent value other than the expectation that someone else will buy it for more. This has similar properties to an MLM in that eventually, the person at the end of the chain (holding the “hot potato”) is out of luck. And I wouldn’t say that is how all markets work, either. Healthy markets are built on products of value, not speculation.
This is a minor point but note that holding USD is not profitable, due to inflation. This is a key difference between crypto and regular currencies. Crypto becomes more scarce over time and so will trend toward becoming more valuable, while the dollar becomes less valuable. Becoming less valuable is a good desirable trait because it encourages people to spend money and actually get the economy moving, rather than hoarding and speculating.
You seem to me like you’ve drunk at least a little of the cyber-libertarian kool-aid. If so, we’ll probably not see eye-to-eye any time soon. But I’ll try to give you a gist of my perspective on the whole affair and you can make of it what you will. The block chain does not offer any substantial benefit as a virtual currency over a regular database, as we have been using for decades. Systems like Steam’s inventory, Neopets collectible pets and World of Warcraft have been creating virtual currencies that worked perfectly long before crypto came along, and without accelerating global warming by using a small country’s worth of power to do it.
You will doubtless respond that decentralisation is the difference that the Block Chain brings along, the value offering. But no-one actually runs their own wallets. If Steam Inventory were using a block chain nothing would change in practice whatsoever because I’d just have a wallet stored and managed by Steam, and access it through a web interface just as I do now with Steam Inventory which is backed by a regular database. It would just be an implementation detail that makes no difference to the actual end-user, who is never going to run their own wallet.
Trust is brought about by regulation and insurance. I know my money is safe because my bank is backed by my country’s central bank, and decades of regulations protecting my investments. With crypto the idea is that trust is guaranteed by the block chain, but again no-one actually runs their own wallets because it is a pain in the butt to do so. So what happens in practice is that you store your wallet with some third-party provider that can later run off with your money with minimal consequences or gets hacked and in either case you don’t get your money back. Both of these scenarios have happened numerous times as I’m sure you must be aware, I hope I don’t need to cite them here.
This isn’t difficult to figure out, everyone that seriously looks at crypto knows it doesn’t really have any practical use-case beyond money laundering and black markets. So why all the paragraphs and paragraphs of libertarian ideological banter about how Bitcoin will usher in a new age of peace and prosperity and fix all the world’s problems etcetera etcetera? Because that is a great way of scamming people, and that is what crypto is at the end of the day. All the folks telling you to “hodl” and creating mountains of memes about how great it is to hold bitcoin and wait, were only doing so in the hope that the people who ate that nonsense up would be daft enough to hold during the next crash, which prevents the price from falling too far and enables the more Machiavellian crypto holders to cash out.
That’s the really sad part of the whole affair. I think there are a number of people who genuinely drink the libertarian kool-aid and think that Bitcoin et al are somehow going to bring about a brave new world, and they’re ultimately just being played for fools by the scam artists who peddle that crap without believing any of it.
What the libertarian dream has achieved is the same thing it always does, it causes exactly the problems regulation is intended to prevent. Insider trading occurs in at least 25% and possibly up to half of all crypto listings. Billions of dollars are stolen by scammers. Banks scamming their own customers (Which, funnily enough, was resolved quite neatly because of precisely the regulations that libertarians want to avoid).
Alright I’m tired. This is just a rant not an essay, you can take it or leave it. Nothing is proof-read. I don’t really have a conclusion other than to say once again that crypto is a scam perpetrated by nasty horrible bad selfish people that are harming society and the planet.