I'm a bit flabbergasted that you, a Wall Street insider, would have the idea of a thought that crypto was anywhere near pure. How the hell did you assure yourself that the crypto game was not being rigged? You can't unless you know the motives of the people buying and selling it (which you can't because it's anonymous by design). You can't even tell which people (not wallets) own a majority of the coins. I'm not judging you. Just wondering how you got into this thought process that crypto could not be rigged.
Easy answer to that one - decentralization. I don't care about the motivations of most people involved as, from the way I saw it, the code kept things relatively pure - there wasn't a group of 5 or 10 or 100 different people manipulating it to their advantage. The way I saw it - people could try and manipulate it all they wanted, but the fact is, if they didn't have 51% of the supply, the crowd would win out. I *still* don't think it can be rigged with any significance...at least, nowhere near the way that the regular markets are.
Hmm, that's interesting. I don't understand how the decentralization argument works. First, more generally, I do not understand how decentralization alone prevents market manipulation by a few. You don't need to own 51% of the world's tulip bulbs to induce people into mania of buying tulip bulbs. You can own a dozen tulip bulbs and trade them with your buddies at increasingly elevated prices. Second, specifically to crypto, due to the anonymity of the platform, you cannot prove that a significant number of coins are not owned by a small coordinated minority. Third, as was demonstrated with Mt. Gox, there *is* centralization in the Bitcoin economy due to the usefulness of exchanging coins with fiat currency.
'Tulip Mania' was never a thing to me...sure, I know the media and folks like to talk about Crypto like it's an irrational behavior (mania) or hype thing, but IMO what the world has accepted as gospel is much more like 'tulip mania'...and that's because, for whatever reason, people just agree that little filthy pieces of green paper with certain words on them have some inherent value... I dunno man. Can things be manipulated in the short term? sure. that's easy. that's ICO's and certain NFT projects that have been rugged. It's much harder to coordinate a long-term manipulation on these types of things because *if that happens, it's likely the whole thing will crumble anyway. Mt. Gox was nearly 10 years ago and only 3-4 years into the whole 'experiment'. That's a growing pain IMO.
I'm a bit flabbergasted that you, a Wall Street insider, would have the idea of a thought that crypto was anywhere near pure. How the hell did you assure yourself that the crypto game was not being rigged? You can't unless you know the motives of the people buying and selling it (which you can't because it's anonymous by design). You can't even tell which people (not wallets) own a majority of the coins. I'm not judging you. Just wondering how you got into this thought process that crypto could not be rigged.
Easy answer to that one - decentralization. I don't care about the motivations of most people involved as, from the way I saw it, the code kept things relatively pure - there wasn't a group of 5 or 10 or 100 different people manipulating it to their advantage. The way I saw it - people could try and manipulate it all they wanted, but the fact is, if they didn't have 51% of the supply, the crowd would win out. I *still* don't think it can be rigged with any significance...at least, nowhere near the way that the regular markets are.
Hmm, that's interesting. I don't understand how the decentralization argument works. First, more generally, I do not understand how decentralization alone prevents market manipulation by a few. You don't need to own 51% of the world's tulip bulbs to induce people into mania of buying tulip bulbs. You can own a dozen tulip bulbs and trade them with your buddies at increasingly elevated prices. Second, specifically to crypto, due to the anonymity of the platform, you cannot prove that a significant number of coins are not owned by a small coordinated minority. Third, as was demonstrated with Mt. Gox, there *is* centralization in the Bitcoin economy due to the usefulness of exchanging coins with fiat currency.
'Tulip Mania' was never a thing to me...sure, I know the media and folks like to talk about Crypto like it's an irrational behavior (mania) or hype thing, but IMO what the world has accepted as gospel is much more like 'tulip mania'...and that's because, for whatever reason, people just agree that little filthy pieces of green paper with certain words on them have some inherent value... I dunno man. Can things be manipulated in the short term? sure. that's easy. that's ICO's and certain NFT projects that have been rugged. It's much harder to coordinate a long-term manipulation on these types of things because *if that happens, it's likely the whole thing will crumble anyway. Mt. Gox was nearly 10 years ago and only 3-4 years into the whole 'experiment'. That's a growing pain IMO.