If you made a really solid crypto today, that was designed to remain solid and relatively flat, it wouldn't be popular - because the whole attraction is the 'easy money' euphoria.
No euphoria, no attention.
It's why a 'really good Bitcoin' - which tried to price at $1 USD today, and remain at that real valuation and avoid devaluation, would be hard pressed to exist - it wouldn't take hold. Or rather - that kind of financial instrument would have to be sold to banks, not small change MLM people, and banks are really conservative. It may happen at some point.
USDC TUSD and BUSD are further popular examples.
Cryptocurrencies are not MLMs, you would do yourself a huge favour by learning what they are.
In brief, Bitcoin is a scarce asset, and Ethereum is the credit required to run trustless logical conditions relating to a transaction, and also securing assets involved in those conditions.
I did and it changed absolutely nothing. It's literally just the dot com bubble all over again but it keeps coming back every 3 years.
Here, I'll explain the core problem of the dot com bubble. People started internet companies with basically close to zero revenue. To convince investors to buy in they used weird non standard metrics that indicate popularity and growth potential like page views. The fact that these businesses were not earning money let the imagination of investors run wild. Companies that were actually earning money had much lower valuations back then, because people immediately understood the value proposition and that growth isn't endless.
It's the same with Bitcoin. There is no reason why it should have such a high market cap. It's only riding network effects but those are all there is to it, MLMs are exactly the same, they endlessly recruit members and that is how they make money.
Because there are no other reasons, the imaginations of speculators run wild. They will come up with an endless number of bullshit reasons that you have to cross check. When the initial pitch turns out to be wrong, they just shift goalposts and come up with another reason. Remember, Bitcoin started out as a currency, then became a store of value and now it is becoming a settlement layer.
Really, if you want to gamble your money in Bitcoin, do it with the realization that it's just that, a gamble with better odds than a conventional casino.
The vast majority of people don't buy Bitcoin because they want a deflationary currency that goes up slightly faster than inflation, they buy into it because of its volatility and ability to generate otherwise impossibly large returns fueled by future investors.
To me, bitcoin is first and foremost a brand.
MLM creates tens of billions in revenue per year in the US alone. Cryptocurrencies aren't inherently marketing schemes but they're pretty close to it and most of the value they have on markets today is basically a case of a 'greater fool' mechanism.
Also market caps for crypto is pretty meaningless. If I mint a trillion random coins and manage to sell a bunch for a dollar I'm the richest man on earth by market cap. Market cap without considering liquidity is meaningless and most if not all of these coins will go to zero as soon as someone actually tries to sell them en masse.
Yes, please do that.
Cryptos are about economics, capital, greed, manias than they are anything technical or block chain.
Cryptos are de-facto scams, irrespective of what some founders or participants might think, at least as of today.
That you can theoretical buy cleaning supplies from Amway does not make it not a scam.
There is nary any value in any of them, and given some of their costs vis-a-vis electricity usage, their 'net value' is definitely very negative.
Anyone with a shred of understanding of actual monetary finance and human nature can see them for what they are.
I think most people do.
Digital currencies have a future in some form, but most (all?) of the cryptos we see today are just straight up 'hustles'.
While they are called crypto currencies, most of them if not all aren't used as currencies.
I just to give a hint I am involved since 2011 and just dumped all crypto. When I get crypto tips from strangers at my son's swimming team, it's about time to quit it.
You can achieve this any number of ways and it has nothing to do with currency or money. FYI Gold, which you can buy a million different ways.
But since prices are crazy volatile, and it could be worth $0 tomorrow, it can't be used as currency, and it makes a terrible store of value.
For every 'practical reason' to use a crypto, there are already many other better solutions.
The only 'real reason' people buy them is because they want to make money flipping it and that's it.
Now that inflation is up again, people are realizing that fact. Gold is going up, Bitcoin is going down.
Disclaimer: I own zero USDT and an insignificant amount of USDC, being rather skeptical on "stablecoins" in general.
That reserves don't add up to the currency in circulation is somewhat similar to a central bank but the similarities end there and they are basically nothing alike.
>"I did the calculation how many coins we needed to become the richest person on the planet," Igor says. "I said to Andreea, 'We need to build it up to 100 million coins, because when this coin goes to €100 and we have 100 million, we are richer than Bill Gates.' It's mathematic. It's easy as that."
100€ * 100 million = 10 billion€ Bill Gates net worth 2016 was 76 billion dollars. So much for "It's mathematic. It's easy as that."
We all have a responsibility to question our beliefs, and what harm our actions cause.
Can you point me to any source that spells it in legal terms in relation to general public (not specific cases like food inspector)? Like some written law.
Also if existed think of what would such law would to to politicians unless they're specifically exempt.
But I agree you don’t need to say think one person is “inherently” more ethical than the other: all else being equal, the person who got badly burned by MLM is going to be more empathetic than the MLM millionaire.
> After Dr Ruja's non-appearance in Lisbon, a point came when Igor Alberts, like Jen McAdam, asked to see evidence of the blockchain. He didn't get it, and in December 2017 he quit.
> I ask if he felt guilty, for having sold so many people a coin that didn't exist, and for having made so much money in the process.
> "I felt responsibility. Not guilt," he replies. "You can never be blamed for believing in something. I had no clue that it could be false. I didn't even know what is a blockchain… What doubt can I have?"
Versus the woman who lost a lot of money and convinced her friends/family to also throw away their money:
> By contrast, Jen McAdam says she bears a heavy burden of guilt. I ask her how much she earned from selling OneCoin and she says it was €3,000 - €1,800 of which she received in cash, and which she used to buy more OneCoin.
The line about “you can never be blamed for believing in something” is of course self-evidently ridiculous and not something Mr. Roberts would pretend to believe in any other context. But “I’m not a bad person, I was a hapless victim like everyone else” has a compelling logic when you’re profiting from a bad system.