• roastpotatothief
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      it is influenced by the amount of investment put into it

      All currencies have this problem. Bigger ones suffer less from it, so you might not notice it. In fact it’s even worse than you say.

      1. Whales actively manipulate the price for profit. It’s not a ponzi scheme. You’re confusing two different things. If you want a buzzword it’s a pump and dump.
      2. This doesn’t affect only currencies but any commodity. Look at oil or food or land or gold. All have exactly the same problem you cite for bitcoin. In fact gold is a very good analogy for bitcoin. You can understand it better by thinking of it as “digital gold”.

      We don’t need to get into the environmental aspects

      Thanks. That’s a tired auld one.

      your biggest stake holders now are the incredibly wealthy

      I’ve thought about this a bit. Right now, I don’t think the currency itself can or should solve this. The only working solution is redistributing wealth through the tax system. It works very well when done properly. So profits from bitcoin should be taxed like any currency trade. Income in bitcoin should be normally. Inheritance tax, and all the rest, should all be agnostic to which currency you use. This is the only proven way.

      If there’s a crypto out there that isn’t available for fiat investment

      That’s a very good idea. How would it work? Have you seen been anything written about this already?

        • roastpotatothief
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          It’s not a Ponzi exactly, it’s called a pump-and-dump. But yes it’s very common and very bad.

          I agree that crypto currencies seem to be used much more for cynical investment profiteering, and much less for commerce, that fiat currencies. Probably because they are new. Investors are much faster at exploiting any new thing.

          Bitcoin has not failed yet. It might become like company shares, an ostensibly useful thing that in practice is just a money-making game for professional gamblers. Or it might find a real large-scale use in the economy. It depends on so many factors.

          The environmental issue really deserves its own discussion. There are several valid ways of looking at it. For example:

          • Bitcoin’s model was simple and robust and successful. But bitcoin’s value increased too much, too fast, making mining very profitable. It’s a victim of its own success.

          • It’s easily fixed, for example by borrowing Monero’s proof-of-work algorithm. But the bitcoin devs need to be given an incentive to change it.

          • This is capitalism - everything gets exploited for profit until it is devastated. It’s not a bitcoin issue it’s sick-society issue.

          • I personally believe that the GPU and electricity crises are being driven by datacentres (collecting human behaviour data) and AI (finding ways to exploit that data for profit and power) but bitcoin is being used as a scapegoat.

          And anyway the solution is not just “ban the bad things”. There are effective ways to disincentivise people from exploiting electricity.

    • guojing
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      sinful impact

      I thought this forum is about technology, and not religion.

      and no one with real money being made is going to change the way it works now.

      Of course, no one is going to change the way an existing currency works, that would cause major trouble. If you want a different type of cryptocurrency, it should start as a new project.

      • rysiek@szmer.infoOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        I thought this forum is about technology, and not religion.

        Cryptocurrencies etc are religion at this stage, debating cryptobros is eerily similar to debating religious fanatics. You get a recital of the “truths of faith”, and any scratching off the surface and pointing out how they are demonstrably untrue gets people angry and start calling you names.

        Plenty of threads here over the last few weeks that prove it.

        • guojing
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          I think the label “bad” is very clearly subjective. For example, gpu manufacturers clearly benefit from this.

        • guojing
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          If we are talking about most coins, then its definitely true that they are poorly run. But surely you can agree that there are at least a handful of technologically interesting crypto projects. For example Sia

          And what exactly do you consider as “sinful impact”? Everything that you personally consider “bad” for some reason?