I'm going to be honest - I feel like this whole industry is nothing but a speculative Ponzi scheme. I don't understand it, and the more I hear about it, the less I "get" of it.
If the intent is to provide a secure store of value then I think this is being conflated by many to be the same as wealth. A representation of value -- e.g. a currency -- is not the same things as wealth. It is merely a system designed to transfer wealth. A tool. Maybe it's more efficient than the dollar, but how much value does that create? We haven't yet seemed to figure that out, as far as I can see.
Wealth is created when someone produces something, whether a service or a good. "Mining" a digital coin and then calling it "wealth" simply because you've said so means absolutely nothing to me.
Plus, you are competing with governments of the world and established currencies that are centuries old in many cases. Yes, you can "print" a dollar and it feels like the same thing, but the difference is that dollar is issued by a government, whereas a cryptocurrency is an unknown store of value (or something) that is only backed by founders who insist that "it's the future" while dumping it in the background. Time and again.
I know, I don't get it. Sometimes I get interested, and then I see too many stories like this, where these companies are just houses of cards.
And what of private crypto when the Fed creates a digital dollar? At that point is the only value privacy? Well, yeah, that has some value, but not what they are thinking.
Can someone explain the point of these things in a paragraph or less? How does it generate wealth?
NFT's are another one. Millions of dollars for a file showing Lebron dunking a ball. "But it's the original!" Uh huh. Zeros and Ones arranged in a particular order.
Hey, you are correct about the Ponzi like schemes prevalent in crypto.
But behind the noise there is a small part of crypto that is trying to build something important which if succeeds creates lots of wealth.
Let me try and explain what they are trying to do in a paragraph (I might not succeed , I am pretty bad at explaining stuff. sry)
We spend a lot of time in the Digital World. Sadly Whatever we do / produce there we don't own much of it. All digital services own the data and we merely rent it. Ex - your content / followers on social media apps , your customers on Amazon , your paid users on App Stores - you don't know anyone. All that data and relationships are owned by the Big Tech. But imagine if all that data is not housed with companies (who serve they shareholders) but housed in public decentralised blocchains with users controlling their own wallets/data . Suddenly you have control over your economic activity in the digital world. Someone created an amazing new twitter client and different algorithm ? Cool use it. (currently twitter won't allow it) . This problem is very tough to solve but some part of crypto is trying to solve it. If successful It creates a lot of wealth. The current digital paradigm is equvivalent to what we had in feudalistic societies and I hope it changes soon.
I would disagree about feudalism. You should look up how those societies operated. I do agree that competition is awesome, and should be encouraged. I'd like to see creators get more of the surplus.
My beef with Helium is the total lack of awareness and transparency. Also, lack of commitment to assuming risk. Why should bagholders be stuck while insiders got rich? Shouldn't all incentives be aligned to build something that would compete with the big corporates? I will say it again, all investors should say if they sold or not. All insiders at Helium should do the same. If they did, buy the tokens back. Take some risk.
I'm going to be honest - I feel like this whole industry is nothing but a speculative Ponzi scheme. I don't understand it, and the more I hear about it, the less I "get" of it.
If the intent is to provide a secure store of value then I think this is being conflated by many to be the same as wealth. A representation of value -- e.g. a currency -- is not the same things as wealth. It is merely a system designed to transfer wealth. A tool. Maybe it's more efficient than the dollar, but how much value does that create? We haven't yet seemed to figure that out, as far as I can see.
Wealth is created when someone produces something, whether a service or a good. "Mining" a digital coin and then calling it "wealth" simply because you've said so means absolutely nothing to me.
Plus, you are competing with governments of the world and established currencies that are centuries old in many cases. Yes, you can "print" a dollar and it feels like the same thing, but the difference is that dollar is issued by a government, whereas a cryptocurrency is an unknown store of value (or something) that is only backed by founders who insist that "it's the future" while dumping it in the background. Time and again.
I know, I don't get it. Sometimes I get interested, and then I see too many stories like this, where these companies are just houses of cards.
And what of private crypto when the Fed creates a digital dollar? At that point is the only value privacy? Well, yeah, that has some value, but not what they are thinking.
Can someone explain the point of these things in a paragraph or less? How does it generate wealth?
NFT's are another one. Millions of dollars for a file showing Lebron dunking a ball. "But it's the original!" Uh huh. Zeros and Ones arranged in a particular order.
"It's art!"
I'm a dinosaur...hear me roar.
Hey, you are correct about the Ponzi like schemes prevalent in crypto.
But behind the noise there is a small part of crypto that is trying to build something important which if succeeds creates lots of wealth.
Let me try and explain what they are trying to do in a paragraph (I might not succeed , I am pretty bad at explaining stuff. sry)
We spend a lot of time in the Digital World. Sadly Whatever we do / produce there we don't own much of it. All digital services own the data and we merely rent it. Ex - your content / followers on social media apps , your customers on Amazon , your paid users on App Stores - you don't know anyone. All that data and relationships are owned by the Big Tech. But imagine if all that data is not housed with companies (who serve they shareholders) but housed in public decentralised blocchains with users controlling their own wallets/data . Suddenly you have control over your economic activity in the digital world. Someone created an amazing new twitter client and different algorithm ? Cool use it. (currently twitter won't allow it) . This problem is very tough to solve but some part of crypto is trying to solve it. If successful It creates a lot of wealth. The current digital paradigm is equvivalent to what we had in feudalistic societies and I hope it changes soon.
I would disagree about feudalism. You should look up how those societies operated. I do agree that competition is awesome, and should be encouraged. I'd like to see creators get more of the surplus.
My beef with Helium is the total lack of awareness and transparency. Also, lack of commitment to assuming risk. Why should bagholders be stuck while insiders got rich? Shouldn't all incentives be aligned to build something that would compete with the big corporates? I will say it again, all investors should say if they sold or not. All insiders at Helium should do the same. If they did, buy the tokens back. Take some risk.
Agree with you regarding helium . There should be some sane agreements (regulations?) so investors/founders don't dump on retail.