SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Scouse]

My only issue is the legion of people willing to actually invest in this shit, in the long term, do they not realise they are lining the pockets of the rich, with something that is infinitely out of their control?

When you buy shares, are you in control of those companies?

When you buy shares, do you not participate in lining the pockets of the rich? (Or pay taxes, or work for a company (you, of course, pay for the costs of your own desk, earn company profits that then go to the shareholders)).

In all of the most important methods of "control" cryptocurrencies are NOT controlled by the rich. Or governments. By design.

You just keep repeating the same thing Raven. You don't have anything to back it up and aren't prepared to do the reading and investigation. There are myriad use cases for crypto.

 

[Raven]

$money$ yeaaaaaah

Edit, I don't buy shares. there are more important things in life. I can't take it with me.

And also, that bit about crypto not being controlled by the rich. Actual lols. You read the intro guide I take it, did you see it in the real world?

 

[Scouse]

Edit, I don't buy shares.

Pension?

And also, that bit about crypto not being controlled by the rich. Actual lols. You read the intro guide I take it, did you see it in the real world?

How do they control it? They can't print it or withold it. (And who is "the rich" we're talking about?)

 

[Raven]

Twitter seems to work for now, I'm sure they will come up with a more complex mechanism before the arse falls out of it.

As for production, ask China, or any other state that gives zero fucks about the environment. Or ask Shell, different commodity, different market, same stain on the world.

But CASH, PENSION SCHEMES, HOLIDAY HOMES, FLIGHTS, AMIRIGHT? Fuck the world, as long as I am alright, Jack.

 

[DaGaffer]

Twitter seems to work for now, I'm sure they will come up with a more complex mechanism before the arse falls out of it.

As for production, ask China, or any other state that gives zero fucks about the environment. Or ask Shell, different commodity, different market, same stain on the world.

But CASH, PENSION SCHEMES, HOLIDAY HOMES, FLIGHTS, AMIRIGHT? Fuck the world, as long as I am alright, Jack.

Actually China is rapidly decarbonizing. I think they figured poisonous smog was hurting productivity.

 

[Raven]

Hence, another reason for Bitcoins drop in value. The comfy folk can't offset their wealth footprint with the 3rd world, so easily

Fuck crypto and all the cunts that sail in it. And that is a hill I am willing to die on.

*again, as a tech, it's fine, as it is currently produced, yeah, no, fuck off, we only have one world and some of us are trying to protect it, beyond hypocritical words on the internet.

 

[DaGaffer]

Pension?

How do they control it? They can't print it or withold it. (And who is "the rich" we're talking about?)

They control it because already having fiat money makes Crypto much easier to manipulate. See Elon Musk. Its just another speculation bubble and its very built in scarcity makes it intrinsically open to abuse. Everyone wants to get rich.

 

[Scouse]

They control it because already having fiat money makes Crypto much easier to manipulate. See Elon Musk. Its just another speculation bubble and its very built in scarcity makes it intrinsically open to abuse. Everyone wants to get rich.

You're just talking market manipulation there though Gaff. And that's as old as time - something rich people do with everything (including the criminal kind - insider trafing, cornering the market a la Trading Places etc. etc).

As (or if) crypto becomes much more widely adopted the ability of the rich to influence the price with such large swings will drop. Volatility will fall dramatically - and this can already be seen and demonstrated very clearly mathematically.

I don't see any of the 'bad things' levelled at crypto not already applying elsewhere - but it does have some very clear advantages over fiat.

 

[Scouse]

as it is currently produced, yeah, no, fuck off

Proof of stake?

 

[Embattle]

Actually China is rapidly decarbonizing. I think they figured poisonous smog was hurting productivity.

Perhaps, but they still build massive amounts of coal powerstations:

Despite Pledges to Cut Emissions, China Goes on a Coal Spree

China is building large numbers of coal-fired power plants to drive its post-pandemic economy. The government has promised a CO2 emissions peak by 2030, but the new coal binge jeopardizes both China’s decarbonization plans and global efforts to tackle climate change.

e360.yale.edu

 

[Scouse]

Fucking dumb Tory voters fall for this shit every time it gets rolled out and every time it achieves precicely dick.

What boggles me is that they don't go "yeah, I've seen this before, like five times in my own lifetime now. I ain't falling for your anti-crime bullshit again." But because it's a bit like the Tories talking about putting the boot in (which is their fantasy with criminals) it plays really well...

 

[Scouse]

Facepalm away @Embattle my friend - but this is what the Police Federation said about this announcement:

We don't need old ideas presented as new

...

 

[Raven]

It's just Tory bollocks to get a headline. Daily Mail readers accross the land will be celebrating MORE JUSTICE but it won't mean dick if the police have no funding.

 

[Hawkwind]

When you buy shares, are you in control of those companies?

If you buy enough, yes 🙂.
I get your point but not a great analogy for me. When you buy shares you should have at least researched the company, it's products and financials (PE etc.). Generally there is a value to what a company produces that can be determined, yes prices of commodities and services can vary but there is something of value produced. Even the value of the companies building, land, machinary and stock...
With bitcoin you get a token that has a perceived value that is more easily manipulated. One tweet from a billionaire and it doubles or halves. That simply would not happen in shares or even commodities. The huge variances are more controlled by common sense and real data.

 

[DaGaffer]

You're just talking market manipulation there though Gaff. And that's as old as time - something rich people do with everything (including the criminal kind - insider trafing, cornering the market a la Trading Places etc. etc).

As (or if) crypto becomes much more widely adopted the ability of the rich to influence the price with such large swings will drop. Volatility will fall dramatically - and this can already be seen and demonstrated very clearly mathematically.

I don't see any of the 'bad things' levelled at crypto not already applying elsewhere - but it does have some very clear advantages over fiat.

Of course I'm talking about market manipulation, but if you have the money (and it seems, the Twitter followers) its easy market manipulation with, apparently, no regulatory sanction.

I'm fully aware of all the potential benefits of blockchain, but cryptocurrencies were probably the worst choice as the first use case because they are being manipulated so easily, and they are an environmental disaster because of the incentives to mine.

 

[Moriath]

When did I say hate?

But you know what, nevermind

It's hard to have a conversation when you instantly go on the defensive every time :/

Looked back and you didnt my bad. But i think its bad for the env and not really any use except buying illegal stuffs. Apart from that cash does ok for me (or plastic).

Like i said i came across the video which appeared in my twitter feed and thought it was interesting / weird what they are doing to hardware like that.
it in itself wasn’t meant to be an comment on any feelings about bitcoin . Hence i posted it as is without any point to make regarding bitcoin added

 

[Moriath]

Facepalm away @Embattle my friend - but this is what the Police Federation said about this announcement:



...

Only way to deal with drug abuse is to legalise it, tax it and put the taxes into centres to help those who abuse it. They are victims not crims. Imo

 

[Scouse]

Only way to deal with drug abuse is to legalise it, tax it and put the taxes into centres to help those who abuse it. They are victims not crims. Imo

Sensible. You just lost the entire Tory votebase tho.

Embattle wants to see crims kicked. So he'll never be voting for that.

 

[Scouse]

Of course I'm talking about market manipulation, but if you have the money (and it seems, the Twitter followers) its easy market manipulation with, apparently, no regulatory sanction.

Two points there (which I've addressed previously).

1) Yep. Agreed - but higher adoption rates will see that ability to manipulate through the emotional posts of a single asshat drop significantly. It is easy right now. But then if you had a small startup company and Musk started tweeting about it then you bet you'd see 10,000% raises in it's share price as investors piled in. None of this is new or different or even unique to crypto.

2) Crypto is crying out for increased regulation. Regulation brings increased legitimacy. But I notice that Musk didn't get sanctioned for potential market manipulation of Tesla prices (and pretty much nobody gets done for price fixing or market manipulation anyway - although it's rampant).

Again, nothing unique to crypto at all.

I'm fully aware of all the potential benefits of blockchain, but cryptocurrencies were probably the worst choice as the first use case because they are being manipulated so easily, and they are an environmental disaster because of the incentives to mine.

The environmental side - moving to proof of stake (or similar) algorithms for the majority of cryptos and industry wide moves to renewables pretty much kills that argument - along with the point I've made that if you bring on a tech that enables replacement of something else that has massive energy and resource usage then that's a gain, not a loss. These arguments are not simple and crypto cannot be dismissed as "environmental disaster" just by pointing your finger at one crypto in isolation (and ignoring that which exists and is potentially replaceable).

As for the first, I see your point and for western economies they clearly don't make sense right now. But public uptake as a transfer of value in countries who's fiat systems are being manipulated, devalued, inflated etc - by competing governments and private actors the world over - is incredible.

A system of currency that's non-manipulatable / printable by governments is intensely more valuable to mankind than the one that's been used to steal public wealth and put it in the hands of the few for generations. Sticking it out there "currency first" sets out a stall. "We have a different way" - and on the back of the 2008 crash that was a powerful message that drove initial adoption.

For me - it's still a powerful message. It was always going to be jumped on by the rich and unscrupulous - everything is and always will be - but by design it's better than what we've got.

Crypto is financial revolution.

 

[old.Osy]

Two points there (which I've addressed previously).

1) Yep. Agreed - but higher adoption rates will see that ability to manipulate through the emotional posts of a single asshat drop significantly. It is easy right now. But then if you had a small startup company and Musk started tweeting about it then you bet you'd see 10,000% raises in it's share price as investors piled in. None of this is new or different or even unique to crypto.

2) Crypto is crying out for increased regulation. Regulation brings increased legitimacy. But I notice that Musk didn't get sanctioned for potential market manipulation of Tesla prices (and pretty much nobody gets done for price fixing or market manipulation anyway - although it's rampant).

Again, nothing unique to crypto at all.


The environmental side - moving to proof of stake (or similar) algorithms for the majority of cryptos and industry wide moves to renewables pretty much kills that argument - along with the point I've made that if you bring on a tech that enables replacement of something else that has massive energy and resource usage then that's a gain, not a loss. These arguments are not simple and crypto cannot be dismissed as "environmental disaster" just by pointing your finger at one crypto in isolation (and ignoring that which exists and is potentially replaceable).

As for the first, I see your point and for western economies they clearly don't make sense right now. But public uptake as a transfer of value in countries who's fiat systems are being manipulated, devalued, inflated etc - by competing governments and private actors the world over - is incredible.

A system of currency that's non-manipulatable / printable by governments is intensely more valuable to mankind than the one that's been used to steal public wealth and put it in the hands of the few for generations. Sticking it out there "currency first" sets out a stall. "We have a different way" - and on the back of the 2008 crash that was a powerful message that drove initial adoption.

For me - it's still a powerful message. It was always going to be jumped on by the rich and unscrupulous - everything is and always will be - but by design it's better than what we've got.

Crypto is financial revolution.

Have to disagree old chap. Crypto is the worst and negatively disrupting technology of this century. 98% of its surface is scams and crime. You're arguing for an ideal with a flawed execution.

Imho, I'd introduce serious restrictions and controls around it, hoping it'll die out a LaserDisc death.

 

[Bodhi]

Only way to deal with drug abuse is to legalise it, tax it and put the taxes into centres to help those who abuse it. They are victims not crims. Imo

I agree up to a point. Weed, ecstasy, aceeeed etc I would favour this approach, given weed isn't really illegal at this point anyway (no one gives a shit that I can tell) so we could use the extra tax, and legalising anything chemical based would mean it would be made by pharma companies, who are (slightly) more trustworthy than the back street garages they are currently made in.

I'd need convincing on the "hard" stuff however - so cocaine, heroin, crystal meth and their derivatives. Agree addicts should be supported instead of criminalised, but they aren't substances I'd want to see the take up of encouraged.

 

[Scouse]

Have to disagree old chap. Crypto is the worst and negatively disrupting technology of this century. 98% of its surface is scams and crime.

I'd like you to provide evidence for that beyond it being what you feel.

There is absolutely a scam and crime industry that's been built up around crypto and crypto is absolutely used in criminal activity - but A) it's not crypto itself and doesn't define it and B) working at a single bank that money laundered $3.2bn in drug money from Mexico, living in a system that is "scams and crime" all over the place - and, more importantly, systemically criminal - then crypto, even in it's current phase, still comes up smelling of roses.

Shit is being flung. But reality isn't the shit fling.

 

[Hawkwind]

Two points there (which I've addressed previously).

1) Yep. Agreed - but higher adoption rates will see that ability to manipulate through the emotional posts of a single asshat drop significantly. It is easy right now. But then if you had a small startup company and Musk started tweeting about it then you bet you'd see 10,000% raises in it's share price as investors piled in. None of this is new or different or even unique to crypto.

This is known as a pump and dump and if the person (Musk) made a profit from it he would end up in jail. The SEC (US) and their equivalents in all major markets have the same rules. There is no such body looking over Crypto.

 

[Scouse]

I'd need convincing on the "hard" stuff however - so cocaine, heroin, crystal meth and their derivatives. Agree addicts should be supported instead of criminalised, but they aren't substances I'd want to see the take up of encouraged.

Cocaine's rife. And if heroin and crystal meth was decriminalised then that'd indeed help. But frankly, legalise and tax the lot. The fact is that criminal access to hard drugs is unknown so we can't track usage, and it funds further crime - and all the shit that goes with that. And people still get the drugs anyway - illegal or not.

Plus, if heroin and crack were legal, there wouldn't be queues down the street to get hold of the skag.

Well. Maybe in Scotland. But nowhere else.

 

[Scouse]

This is known as a pump and dump and if the person (Musk) made a profit from it he would end up in jail. The SEC (US) and their equivalents in all major markets have the same rules. There is no such body looking over Crypto.

1) I think you're optimistic over the consequences of institutional pump-and-dump activities that go on with regular commodities. But I don't necessarily disagree with you.

but - and importantly - look at my second point in the post you quoted.


Not having a go at you Hawkwind - but a lot of the things people bring up I've already addressed (repeatedly). Mainly because people have similar objections, so I know what's coming

 

[Bodhi]

Fucking dumb Tory voters fall for this shit every time it gets rolled out and every time it achieves precicely dick.

What boggles me is that they don't go "yeah, I've seen this before, like five times in my own lifetime now. I ain't falling for your anti-crime bullshit again." But because it's a bit like the Tories talking about putting the boot in (which is their fantasy with criminals) it plays really well...

And to go back to the beginning of the conversation, I can tell you as a Tory voter - mostly through lack of better options - there is no part of this proposal that isn't making me shudder. Especially this bit:

"If you are guilty of anti-social behaviour and you are sentenced to unpaid work, as many people are, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be out there in one of those fluorescent-jacketed chain gangs visibly paying your debt to society," he said.

It's making me start to wonder - are there any political parties in the UK for those of us on the bottom half of the political compass? As all the options currently seem to be arguing about who can be the most authoritarian, which isn't really the sort of country I want to live in tbh.

 

[Hawkwind]

1) I think you're optimistic over the consequences of institutional pump-and-dump activities that go on with regular commodities. But I don't necessarily disagree with you.

but - and importantly - look at my second point in the post you quoted.


Not having a go at you Hawkwind - but a lot of the things people bring up I've already addressed (repeatedly). Mainly because people have similar objections, so I know what's coming

Totally agree with the second point, very valid. Personally have no issue with the technology and what Cypto brings. However, it is too easily manipulated by people with influence, not just billionaires like Musk or Soros. Conceptually I like it, I just don't trust it. It does not help that certain groups of influencers like Faze Clan giving Crypto a bad name.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgR1Ci8vSB0

 

[Scouse]

Conceptually I like it, I just don't trust it. It does not help that certain groups of influencers like Faze Clan giving Crypto a bad name.

It's very different - that's just scammers being scammers. There's thousands of people who give men who rock up at their door their life savings. Or people handing money over to nigerian 419 scammers.

Crypto was never going to be any different. Scammers exist. However, nobody is saying "lets not do fiat" because scammers exist. Or that Nigerian 419 scammers is giving "fiat" a bad name. It's a weak argument IMO. Same happens all over the shop, actual ponzi schemes, phoenix companies (legitimate crime!) etc etc.

Where <insert anything you like> exists there is crime. Period.

 

[Gwadien]

I agree up to a point. Weed, ecstasy, aceeeed etc I would favour this approach, given weed isn't really illegal at this point anyway (no one gives a shit that I can tell) so we could use the extra tax, and legalising anything chemical based would mean it would be made by pharma companies, who are (slightly) more trustworthy than the back street garages they are currently made in.

I'd need convincing on the "hard" stuff however - so cocaine, heroin, crystal meth and their derivatives. Agree addicts should be supported instead of criminalised, but they aren't substances I'd want to see the take up of encouraged.

Just look at music festivals for the 'hard' stuff - they test it for you etc, that's why the 'hard' stuff is dangerous because it's not regulated on what it is in it and how much won't kill you.

 

[BloodOmen]

FFX fan demo running on Unreal 5


View: https://youtu.be/uEyVMvdMMr8