←back to thread

I wasted years of my life in crypto

(twitter.com)
681 points Anon84 | 1 comments | 07 Dec 25 12:57 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
spicyusername ◴[07 Dec 25 13:28 UTC] No.46181533[source]▶
I've never understood the initial arguments about Bitcoin, no matter how many times they've been explained to me.

The block chain is, and always was, an extremely inconvenient database. How anyone, especially many intelligent people, thought it was realistic to graft a currency on top of such a unwieldy piece of technology is beyond me. Maybe it goes to show how few people understand economics and anthropology and how dunning-krueger can happen to anyone.

Now the uninformed gambling on futuristic sounding hokum? THAT is easy to understand.

That being said, I'm sorry the author had to go through this experience, the road of life is often filled with unexpected twists and turns.

replies(48): >>46181550 #>>46181552 #>>46181565 #>>46181570 #>>46181587 #>>46181592 #>>46181595 #>>46181598 #>>46181626 #>>46181627 #>>46181644 #>>46181650 #>>46181665 #>>46181684 #>>46181692 #>>46181705 #>>46181710 #>>46181747 #>>46181851 #>>46182086 #>>46182181 #>>46183207 #>>46183326 #>>46184155 #>>46188845 #>>46188916 #>>46189281 #>>46189390 #>>46189635 #>>46189752 #>>46190184 #>>46190277 #>>46190352 #>>46190438 #>>46190551 #>>46190980 #>>46192357 #>>46192629 #>>46192718 #>>46192829 #>>46193037 #>>46193082 #>>46193531 #>>46193609 #>>46194845 #>>46194934 #>>46195115 #>>46203155 #
bloppe ◴[08 Dec 25 09:36 UTC] No.46190277[source]▶
To understand the initial arguments, look no further than the Genesis block, which includes this text:

The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks

In many rich countries, all signs point to nasty inflation for the foreseeable future. Bitcoin is inflation-proof because there is no central bank that can print more Bitcoin. Having a secure system with that property means accepting some tradeoffs in terms of usability and efficiency, compared to a centralized database.

replies(3): >>46190336 #>>46190403 #>>46190780 #
pas ◴[08 Dec 25 09:44 UTC] No.46190336[source]▶
but there's no compounding interest. no dividend based on future cashflows.

holding stocks of a diverse index seems better on the long run, no?

replies(3): >>46190369 #>>46190463 #>>46190537 #
cherryteastain ◴[08 Dec 25 09:48 UTC] No.46190369[source]▶
Check out how $100 put in bank deposits or S&P500 have done versus gold over the last 50 years. You will find that these do not generate real returns when measured against sound currency either.
replies(2): >>46190558 #>>46190646 #
1. jbstack ◴[08 Dec 25 10:24 UTC] No.46190646{3}[source]▶
I'm not sure how you reached this conclusion. I did as you suggested. $100 invested 50 years ago into gold would be worth $3000 today. $100 invested into the S&P500 50 years ago would be worth $6870.

https://www.macrotrends.net/2324/sp-500-historical-chart-dat... https://www.macrotrends.net/1333/historical-gold-prices-100-...