|
EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:This is by all estimates a pretty clear edge case so let's get back to bashing lower middle class whites spending beyond their means and "budgeting" revolving around horse equity. Sure! How about you go and replace your "sup guys, i've diversified into craptocurrency" selfpost with "Sorry, didn't mean to derail!" and then perhaps we can drop it. Because as it is, you're just pulling a "I've had the last word so now it's time for you all to stop dunking on me for owning buttcoin, can we please think about the point of this thread now?" 
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:38 |
|
|
if i had 10 million dollars i'd be very tempted to put a mil into bitcoins. i think at this point goons just don't want to admit they overestimated the risk, as a pride thing. the technology behind bitcoin is extremely solid and it's only when you get into online wallets and poo poo that scams abound. it's not like rare, famous things with zero utility or inherent value being expensive is unique to bitcoins. see collectors art, stamps, dildos etc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Zo posted:if i had 10 million dollars i'd be very tempted to put a mil into bitcoins It's not hard to put money into bitcoins. The trick is getting it out again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
And there's still no (not tied to illegal activities) use case for it, which is part of why its value is so unstable. Aside from the true believers who swear mass bitcoin adoption is around the corner any day now, it's just a bunch of people gambling on it going up up up and hoping they're not left holding the bag.Factor Mystic posted:It's not hard to put money into bitcoins. The trick is getting it out again. In this hypothetical scenario where you want to gamble huge amounts of money on something, why not put it into a stock or something? At least that way you can take your money back out without a fuss. It's never been trivial to convert large amounts of bitcoins back into real money. Haifisch fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Sep 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
The thing that keeps me out of bitcoins, sketchiness aside, is the risk that someone will come along with a better version, rendering it worthless. The technology behind bitcoin may be sound, but it's got a bunch of downsides like speed, energy cost, and lack of fungibility, and now that the ground's been broken I'm sure people are working hard on coming up with new approaches that fix those.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
Ralith posted:The thing that keeps me out of bitcoins, sketchiness aside, is the risk that someone will come along with a better version, rendering it worthless. The technology behind bitcoin may be sound, but it's got a bunch of downsides like speed, energy cost, and lack of fungibility, and now that the ground's been broken I'm sure people are working hard on coming up with new approaches that fix those. anyway im not even taking about the technology behind bitcoin being a viable currency. it is not and will never be a viable currency because of the problems you mentioned. i'm just saying the scarcity and security (of an offline wallet) makes it at least as secure of a high risk investment as rare dildos.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
You wouldn't put 10% of your net worth into Zimbabwe Dollars because "the technology behind the printing press is extremely solid." Buying bitcoins is placing a long term bet that bitcoins and not some other crypocurrency will be more valuable in the future than it is now. The fact that it keeps appreciating in value when there's virtually no legitimate stores to spend this currency is what makes it such a stupidly risky speculative bet. It worked for this one guy but he's smart to cash out now before the bubble bursts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
GamingHyena posted:You wouldn't put 10% of your net worth into Zimbabwe Dollars because "the technology behind the printing press is extremely solid." Buying bitcoins is placing a long term bet that bitcoins and not some other crypocurrency will be more valuable in the future than it is now. The fact that it keeps appreciating in value when there's virtually no legitimate stores to spend this currency is what makes it such a stupidly risky speculative bet. It worked for this one guy but he's smart to cash out now before the bubble bursts. that's an asinine comparison and i can't tell if you're dumb or trolling, so i'll spell it out for you. it is not possible to make more bitcoins on demand (or at all, once the built in cap is reached), where as it is possible for both zimbabwe dollars and zimbabwe dollar printing presses. plus multiple cryptocurrencies can appreciate at the same time, as they are doing right now. i'm also not arguing it is not high risk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Zo posted:that's an asinine comparison and i can't tell if you're dumb or trolling, so i'll spell it out for you. it is not possible to make more bitcoins on demand (or at all, once the built in cap is reached), where as it is possible for both zimbabwe dollars and zimbabwe dollar printing presses.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Zo posted:that's an asinine comparison and i can't tell if you're dumb or trolling, so i'll spell it out for you. it is not possible to make more bitcoins on demand (or at all, once the built in cap is reached), where as it is possible for both zimbabwe dollars and zimbabwe dollar printing presses. You miss the point of the example. When you buy a bitcoin your are betting that a BITCOIN (and only a bitcoin) will increase in value. Not some other crypto currency, not the technology behind cryptocurrencies, but Bitcoin. The technology behind Bitcoins is irrelevant to its value in the same way the printing press technology has nothing to do with the value of USD versus ZWL. So if you were to speculate on bitcoin because "the technology is extremely solid" that is a silly reason because the technology has nothing to do with whether it or some other cryptocurrency will become more or less valuable in the future.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
GamingHyena posted:You miss the point of the example. When you buy a bitcoin your are betting that a BITCOIN (and only a bitcoin) will increase in value. Not some other crypto currency, not the technology behind cryptocurrencies, but Bitcoin. The technology behind Bitcoins is irrelevant to its value in the same way the printing press technology has nothing to do with the value of USD versus ZWL. well you should read my post better, because i never said the technology itself is a reason to speculate. it just makes the speculation secure from risks like, oh i dont know, zimbabwe deciding to print a hundred trillion bazillion dollars. if you were to speculate, the only reason would be, as you said, on a bet that bitcoin will arbitrarily increase in value.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
You can look forward to sorting through piles of bitcoins on the courtroom floor during your future divorce.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
Zo posted:the technology behind bitcoin is extremely solid Tell me more about how you've apparently figured out a way to use the transaction ID to identify a transaction
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
I don't care how solid bitcoin tech is, or how lucrative it could be. Knowing what its systems are used for, and how my participation would help such systems, I don't want to be a part of it. It's a very different kind of bad with money, and not the funny kind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Tell me more about how you've apparently figured out a way to use the transaction ID to identify a transaction Did they ever resolve that hard fork issue about block size or whatever? Anybody shut down the system again for three days for a $3,000 "stress test"? Has anyone come up with a convincing use case for block chain technology?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Did they ever resolve that hard fork issue about block size or whatever? They "resolved" it by... hard forking, creating two bitcoins, one called bitcoin (BTC) and the other called bitcoin cash (BCC) I already don't remember which one is which and this only happened like a month ago
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:
Someone mentioned pharmacy and drug supply chain integrity. It's a high-value industry with lots of risk of counterfeiting and whose dangers from counterfeit products can have serious adverse effects. Also transactions don't have to be instantaneous, so small delays from updating the block chain aren't as deleterious as trying to use it for cash. How you tie it to the drugs themselves and not just the packaging is a problem, of course.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
Could you describe specifically how a block chain would solve that problem? Ignoring the contents vs the packaging. I can't see any particular method that is superior to more straightforward means of incorporating cryptography into verification of the manufacturing and distribution chain. ohgodwhat fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
If I'm buying a product from Shkreli Inc, wouldn't it make more sense to check the lot and batch number against Shkreli Inc.' secure database, that they can update if there's a recall or anything else?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Adding more fuel to the fire, but the lack of regulation around cryptocurrency is a detriment in my eyes, not a benefit. Why the gently caress would I ever want the value of my currency to be unregulated?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
The value of CryptoChat is rapidly declining, I suggest everyone dump their position ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:If I'm buying a product from Shkreli Inc, wouldn't it make more sense to check the lot and batch number against Shkreli Inc.' secure database, that they can update if there's a recall or anything else? That would involve using reliable and proven technology. People are obsessed with the block chain even though it's just a series of public journal entries. I don't find accounting processes exciting. PAMP Suisse have Veriscan for their gold bars. It checks against their database by serial number and the image stamped on the bar. I know there's been discussion around use of the block chain for the metals market due to rehypothication issues. For example how ANZ Bank bought 30,000 tonnes of nothing. https://www.ft.com/content/6c3eb4ac-5b28-11e7-9bc8-8055f264aa8b
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
Moneyball posted:The value of CryptoChat is rapidly declining, I suggest everyone dump their position ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
Moneyball posted:The value of CryptoChat is rapidly declining, I suggest everyone dump their position ASAP. What are you talking about, CryptoChat can only go up uP UP! In BWM news, my cousin buttonholed me at the family reunion to talk about this great new opportunity he was interested in, FlipYourCapital.com! (.org? I dunno, it was FlipYourCapital though) Some backstory: he's a high-energy person that I'm almost certain has serious ADHD, did poorly in school but great in sports. He joined the Army, served as a cook, and was discharged after he got run over by a parked truck. He was seriously injured (as in hospitalized for months, nearly had an arm amputated, still not 100%) and is almost certainly getting VA disability, though with rehab he's been able to work in a casino as a head cook. He supports his recently-naturalized wife and their two kids, one of whom has an autoimmune disorder that is causing his liver to fail. The kid has had more surgeries than anyone I know of and is back on the transplant list after a surgery that removed most of his colon to try to help with said liver failure stopped working. Based on the name my cousin mentioned I figured it was the typical house-flipping scam: buy foreclosed property at a discount, do the bare minimum of cheap work that makes it looks nice but just hides all the problems, sell for a profit and run before your pasteboard repairs fall down. But it was so much much worse than that. This cousin was telling me all about this thing where you provided capital to a property management group and they did all the work buying cheap foreclosed homes, finding tenants and renting them while you collected your share of the rents. I asked him basic questions like "Who cleans and repairs the abandoned properties?" and "What if the renters default?" and "Who is legally responsible or liable for the properties?" and he said "They kick them out for you, and here's the best part: they give them a rent to own contract and let them do all the improvements, but if they miss a payment they're evicted and you get to keep the improvements! Then they find a new renter and repeat!" My face:  "That sounds horribly illegal and even if it wasn't, horribly unethical and it should be shut down." To which he replied, "No don't you see, they're helping people, but only the ones that have their poo poo together. drat government, always getting in the way, helping people that don't deserve it."  Bonus BWM: his wife bought into Avon or Mary Kay big time, the idea being she could "work from home" and care for their sick child. Lo and behold everyone is getting lotion and shampoo for Christmas presents for the last five years as she starts liquidating her stock. When he first started talking I was worried it was another MLM, because he started with the whole "making a money pipeline" analogy, "make your money do the work." His wife is really nice at least  (Other problems I foresaw with his pitch: I doubt these "repairs and improvements" are going to be by licensed experienced contractors, and I've seen enough DIY work that the odds the improvements actually increase the house's livability or value are 0%, and I bet that any money you provide comes with you assuming all of the legal risk, plus all the problems that come from becoming a slumlord, ethical legal and moral)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:What are you talking about, CryptoChat can only go up uP UP! This lending tactic was used heavily during the redlining era to steal every ounce of wealth possible from minority communities. Glad to see it's still alive and well!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 03:22
|
|
|
it is literally the same tactics the truck operators use in LA. See the article I posted a few pages back. In that article, the boss of one of the companies that got sued (and lost) was quoted as being very upset that his efforts to "help" people had been repaid by lawsuits. How dare they sue! I can't believe there are people out there that actually think like this 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I don't care how solid bitcoin tech is, or how lucrative it could be. Knowing what its systems are used for, and how my participation would help such systems, I don't want to be a part of it. It's a very different kind of bad with money, and not the funny kind. Ok then move along. Keep in mind any money invested in s&p or other index Funds your money is being used to gently caress people and places over daily.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 05:31
|
|
|
powrslave posted:Ok then move along. Keep in mind any money invested in s&p or other index Funds your money is being used to gently caress people and places over daily. As opposed to bitcoin, where I'm the one getting hosed over?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 05:42
|
|
|
Investing in a company is not giving money to the company. Your money is given to other investors in exchange for their fractional ownership; no more and no less.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 05:49
|
|
|
If someone can condense down into a good smiley i'll buy it
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:If someone can condense How's  for you?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:How's Not the same sentiment and not really used in the same context, though fine in its own right 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 06:13
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:This lending tactic was used heavily during the redlining era to steal every ounce of wealth possible from minority communities. Glad to see it's still alive and well! Oh, it's big business: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/22/business/dealbook/rent-to-own-homes-a-win-win-for-landlords-a-risk-for-struggling-tenants.html quote:Mr. Szkaradek refers to Vision’s seven-year contract as a “hybrid lease” that enables renters to build up “implied equity” with each monthly rent payment. Click through to the article for charming stories of a company that is a financing company when a landlord might be obligated to keep a property minimally habitable, but a landlord when a financing company would be obligated to provide truth-in-lending disclosures. And, of course, they still target poor minority communities. There's a lot of money in desperate poverty 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 06:15
|
|
|
BWM Aussie versionquote:Hopefully will be brief: my wife and I have recently moved from Melbourne to a regional city, ostensibly to be closer to family for help with raising our 2yo, and also for a change of pace. Of course, this has brought with it significant financial instability, as I'm the sole earner, and have gone from a full-time permanent role at $96k to casual work. Just been offered a contract for two months at $88k fte, with a vague suggestion of permanency after the contract ends. it's not the worst BWM out there but it is special. They're essentially millionaires, with a rental property that actually makes them money. But they both have no stable jobs and the wife wants to start a business. He's unsure what to do..... "Get stable employment".
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Sounds like a job for Mr. Money Mustache, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 13:51
|
|
|
Suspicious Lump posted:"Get stable employment". That means buy a horse and take care of it, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
From a reply to someone who claimed they hadn't thought through it financially:quote:Can see how you might think this, but a lot of thought was given by us to the move, and your analysis leaves no room for the human element - i.e. we NEEDED the change. Melbourne wasn't working for us, even if we were more financially stable opposable thumbs.db fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Sep 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
if they never plan to go back to Melbourne why not sell that house, pay off the note, and have three quarters of a million dollars to piss away on your wife's dumb rear end MLM company or whatever? If I were in the Australian property market right now I would be looking to convert to cold hard cash ASAP, that poo poo is absolutely insane.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Ralith posted:Investing in a company is not giving money to the company. Your money is given to other investors in exchange for their fractional ownership; no more and no less. That's a very simplistic and one sided view of things. Yes, if you are buying public company share on a stock exchange this is PROBABLY but not always what is happening. Companies both public and privately held often issue stock to raise capital (i.e. "equity funding").
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:38 |
|
|
Motronic posted:That's a very simplistic and one sided view of things. Yes, if you are buying public company share on a stock exchange this is PROBABLY but not always what is happening. Companies both public and privately held often issue stock to raise capital (i.e. "equity funding"). IPOS and secondary offerings are pretty exclusively handled by large institutions. If you are buying shares for a personal account there is nearly zero chance a single penny goes to the company itself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:58
|
|