tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post8944524767949320040..comments2024-03-28T06:53:23.473-04:00Comments on Moneyness: Why did Dogecoin take off but Feathercoin didn't?JP Koninghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-74789596530260446682023-07-20T09:26:53.430-04:002023-07-20T09:26:53.430-04:00Your history is off, anon.
Dogecoin's success...Your history is off, anon.<br /><br />Dogecoin's success began far before Elon seized on it. Elon talked about Dogecoin *because* it was already famous.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-44733736987659148152023-07-20T08:21:33.851-04:002023-07-20T08:21:33.851-04:00This blog is so useless. The main reason it pumped...This blog is so useless. The main reason it pumped was because Elon talked about it. Just get any billionaire to talk about any coin that will pump in a matter of days.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-25321285313238126802021-04-23T18:06:08.659-04:002021-04-23T18:06:08.659-04:00Bitcoin is certainly not made of paper, and no leg...Bitcoin is certainly not made of paper, and no legal authority anywhere has defined Bitcoin as a piece of paper, so your claim that Bitcoin is like a piece of paper is wrong!Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-37369242185271146862021-04-23T18:00:35.961-04:002021-04-23T18:00:35.961-04:00Wrong, google the words 'bitcoin commodity'...Wrong, google the words 'bitcoin commodity'<br />The first result confirms it, there is a link to 'Bitcoin Basics' stating precisely that the CEA (Commodities Exchange Act) and Commodity Futures Exchange Commission consider bitcoin a commodity. <br /><br />'Bitcoin basics' meaning, this circular is supposed to help educate people to the most fundamental aspect of understanding bitcoin, which is that it is a commodity. Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-21817984475820646092021-04-23T06:25:01.553-04:002021-04-23T06:25:01.553-04:00Rob: Good to hear.
Lou: There's a simple test...Rob: Good to hear.<br /><br />Lou: There's a simple test for whether something is a commodity or not. Imagine that there was a rule that people couldn't resell copper to other investors/speculators after buying it. People would still purchase some copper anyway to use for building stuff, electronics, etc. But if Bitcoin or Dogecoin resale was likewise prohibited, no one would ever buy them in the first place. Because they can't be used as commodities.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-66387299104069771962021-04-22T22:22:58.066-04:002021-04-22T22:22:58.066-04:00OK, you have got me 90% convinced.OK, you have got me 90% convinced.robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04682517711551179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-91367218473400195012021-04-22T16:28:06.307-04:002021-04-22T16:28:06.307-04:00"money flowing up an old fashioned chain lett..."money flowing up an old fashioned chain letter and a sale of Dogecoin are functionally equivalent." No, they are not because anyone who has purchased Dogecoin could have sold at anytime meaning they are not benefiting in anyway by new entrants, they may have also lost money by having bought high and selling low and never to return. <br /><br />Chain letters offer nothing helpful to understanding cryptocurrency and your insistence on this comparison is triggering, referring to 'slots' which literally do not exist in crypto is making my blood boil. Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-43321578311929361202021-04-22T16:16:56.436-04:002021-04-22T16:16:56.436-04:00The main usefulness of your analogy is for you to ...The main usefulness of your analogy is for you to relieve yourself of any regret for not buying bitcoin when you could have by comparing it to an apparent scam. <br /><br />It's the equivalent of willful ignorance, or intentional misdirection. Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-36540339178785264922021-04-22T16:06:55.595-04:002021-04-22T16:06:55.595-04:00Saying bitcoin is not a commodity because it can&#...Saying bitcoin is not a commodity because it can't be used up or consumed is equivalent to me saying that bitcoin is not like a chain letter because it's not made out of paper. JP are you saying bitcoin is made out of paper?Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-81287012931686184652021-04-22T14:15:13.631-04:002021-04-22T14:15:13.631-04:00Rob: I think you've answered your own comment....Rob: I think you've answered your own comment. Yes, money flowing up an old fashioned chain letter and a sale of Dogecoin are functionally equivalent. <br /><br />In old fashioned hierarchical chain letters, money flowed up the chain as late players added their name to the list and sent dollars to slots owned by earlier players. With Dogecoin, late players also pay off early players, but they make the payoff a bit differently: by directly buying slots owned by earlier players (and/or bidding the price of slots higher.) Either way it's the same mechanism.<br /><br />Lou: Bitcoin is not a commodity because it can't be used up or consumed. Copper, for instance, is a useful building product. JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-81463294452811090702021-04-22T10:11:36.778-04:002021-04-22T10:11:36.778-04:00Perhaps as money flows up in a chain letter hierar...Perhaps as money flows up in a chain letter hierarchy this is functionally equivalent to the sale of a slot in a crypto flat list ? (One all the money has flowed up to a specific slot in a chain letter that slot is in effect eliminated).robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04682517711551179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-74605825382702363262021-04-22T09:59:34.696-04:002021-04-22T09:59:34.696-04:00At what point can you admit your analogy breaks do...At what point can you admit your analogy breaks down? <br /><br />Expensive Whiskey and Bitcoin are more similar than bitcoin and chain letters. <br />I can make an argument that even Apples and Bitcoin are more similar. <br /><br />Bitcoin functions more as a commodity than a Ponzi scheme. Making a crypto comparison to chain letters might be interesting if you limited it to simply the way people promote them, but trying to say that chain letters are some kind of historical precedent to crypto is asinine because someone with a modecum of intellect is able to understand the very credible differentiation between something that IS A PONZI and something that is NOT A PONZI. Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-18516853648261548222021-04-22T09:54:55.718-04:002021-04-22T09:54:55.718-04:00So in summary:
- Both HFCL and Crypto are simi...So in summary: <br /><br />- Both HFCL and Crypto are similar in that they are lists and are setup so that early-comers are more likely to make money than late-comers.<br /><br />- They are different in that Crypto has used blockchain technology to move from a hierarchical to a flat list structure which means that all elements in a crypto list have the same value.<br /><br />Does that sound right ? If so, I'm still not fully convinced (It still feels like the fact that a slot in a HFCL might really bring in some income to the holder in a way that a cryto unit never will unless its sold is a very significant difference) but thanks for the clarifications! <br /><br /> robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04682517711551179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-40078221057771922162021-04-22T06:39:17.957-04:002021-04-22T06:39:17.957-04:00Rob: "I'm not sure how this maps on to cr...Rob: "I'm not sure how this maps on to crypto. Here 'slots' are created over time but all existent slots have the same value."<br /><br />Yep. I mentioned this in passing in my post, but it's an important point. Instead of being hierarchical, all spots in the Dogecoin list are "equal, or fungible." <br /><br />That's one of the big upgrades that Dogecoin brings to the old fashioned chain letter model. Not only does it create all list entries at once, but it also removes the classic tiered relationship between slots. (And it does this while preserving decentralization.) <br /><br />Dogecoin is still tiered, but the tiering has been relocated. It's no longer built into the relationship between slots, with slots higher in the chain dominating lower ones. Tiering is now a function of how early (or late) one buys a pre-existing fungible spot in line. As in any chain letter, those who get into the list early are paid by latecomers.<br /><br />So to sum up, Dogecoin and your parent's chain letter are both lists. Each list has different rules. But either way, the earliest to get a spot wins.<br /><br />Lou: if you don't have anything of value to contribute, please desist from commenting.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-16433216639079580202021-04-22T00:34:06.933-04:002021-04-22T00:34:06.933-04:00You're being polite by saying you don't ge...You're being polite by saying you don't get the analogy. <br /><br />The analogy is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read, and I've been on the internet since 1994. Lou Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17503827697001403269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6704573462403312459.post-27617141676682124932021-04-21T20:13:14.734-04:002021-04-21T20:13:14.734-04:00I'm not quite getting the Crypto = HFCL analog...I'm not quite getting the Crypto = HFCL analogy.<br /><br />If all the slots in a (virtual?) Chain Letter were created and sold at a single point in time slots that received payments earlier would be worth more than slots where the payment was later. Slots where the payment was felt to be unlikely to made at all would have zero value. The value of slots could to some extent be estimated based on likely return.<br /><br />I'm not sure how this maps on to crypto. Here 'slots' are created over time but all existent slots have the same value. This value varies based not on expected return but simple (as far as I can see) based on expected future value (and expected future value will itself be based on expected future value in the future - a concept that makes my brain seek alcoholic relief!).<br /><br />Chain letters appear to me to be to be easily explainable as Ponzi schemes. They are objectively unsustainable but the value of an early slot in line could clearly still have value. I'm not seeing crypto as an obvious Ponzi scheme. People buy crypto based on expected future value and (I doubt it - but who knows) if a specific crypto eventually becomes the world medium of exchange then those who HODLed it will be rich for the same reason that early HODLers of Amazon or Apple are now rich. <br /><br />Probably just missing the driver behind the analogy - love the blog !robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04682517711551179057noreply@blogger.com