Comment on SEC says it will deregulate cryptocurrencies with 'Project Crypto'

• iopq@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  You mean the value that crashed like 30% over two years? At least bitcoin went back up

  source

  • Lumisal@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    It rebounding and crashing by hundreds in value like a meth head on caffeinated cocaine laced with LSD is what doesn’t make it a currency.

    No one wants a shit currency where one day a donut costs 1000 and the next 2000 and on the weekend it’s either 599 or 3999.

    That’s why it’s at best a speculative asset, except it’s dumber than that because it’s intangible. It’s like the long term stupidity of fiat mixed with insane instability, all while using way more resources.

    source

    • iopq@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Same thing happened to the Argentine peso, let’s not pretend if you make a government currency it’s magically stable

      source

      • Lumisal@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        The Argentine peso crashed and then stayed down. That’s actually a sign of stability, because it’s remaining at a constant, not jumping up and down wildly.

        It didn’t crash only to go back to original value to the decrease by half and undulate like a wave, like Bitcoin and other crypto does.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• rottingleaf@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Honestly this is bullshit. In 1880s China they’d sometimes use thousand years old coins to pay for stuff. Coins of fucking non-standard weight and value! With symbols of sometimes dead writing systems (like Tangut). And still that was currency.

  BTW, I once had an idea of a truly decentralized electronic currency without proof of work and all such, with plenty of emitters, signed transactions and coins of different emitters and parties or partitions having different value, determined via market mechanisms. Like automatic haggling on every transaction, a bit the way MMORPG markets have it, except, eh, they still have some fixed currency, and here it would all be relative.

  For all the inconveniences it would have two very good traits - no blockchain and no power effect (like the majority of the network deciding something or premined coins). But this isn’t important because GNU Taler people have made basically a similar, but far better, system than what I imagined, and theirs actually exists.

  source

  • Lumisal@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    1 Bitcoin used to be with less than a dollar.

    Now it’s thousands of dollars.

    It’s also lost thousands of dollars in value.

    It hasn’t even been 2 decades.

    There’s never been ANYTHING that volatile and unstable aside from maybe fucking tulips.

    source

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Well, it should have went to some value from no value. So initial volatility was to be expected.

      While the current volatility - I don’t know, I guess it’s because a transaction is expensive and takes some time. If transactions would cost almost nothing and were almost instantaneous, I’d expect the volatility by now to not be very big. And if there were no premined coins, of course.

      And if there were inflation built into the system. BTC proponents boast how it having no such artificial mechanism is good.

      They, 1) don’t understand that having inflation stabilizes a currency, because there’s a stimulus to spend practically and not as part of speculation, 2) don’t understand that what they would want to imitate, gold, has inflation too.

      So - inflation and cheap and fast transactions are what would make BTC less volatile. It would be a less lucrative speculative active.

      source

      • Lumisal@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        So - inflation and cheap and fast transactions are what would make BTC less volatile.

        Yeah, and we have that…

        It’s called fiat currency 🙄

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • jj4211@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        The reason for volatility is that any such concept at scale is subject to just the messiest lump of evolving opinions on everything. It will deflate, inflate, deflate wildly because it’s utterly subject to the whims of the people without any mechanism to counter a lack of mass consensus on what ‘value’ is.

        We started noticing as things scaled up, there needed to be some regulatory management to counter the whimsical populace. Hard to fight mass inflation or deflation when you can’t do anything to manage the “money supply” to offset panic.

        source

        • -> View More Comments