Certain tulip bulbs were once selling for 10,000 Guilders, so I guess that's what they were worth. Although another perspective would be that is what they were selling for at the time, but they were worth considerably less.
Dated argument and one that has been long since outed as ill-fitting. The tulip bubble was one boom 'n bust...not a series of boom n bust cycles. In terms of tulips being a store of value, they could never be seeing as they're not finite..
Ah, so bitcoin is a 'scam'?
Here's ChatGPT on that assertion -> "No, Bitcoin is not a scam. Bitcoin is a legitimate and innovative form of digital currency that has gained significant attention and adoption since its inception. It has been used for various purposes, including as a store of value, a medium of exchange, and an investment asset."
I think it's the same with bitcoin, like alternative art it is seen as cool and alternative. It's worth the huge money because it has built up the reputation as being worth alot. Just like the alternative art scene pretends it is equivalent to the great masters, bitcoin pretends it is like gold
Pretends? I'm the farthest thing from an art buff but what you're setting out is that if sufficient people assign value to something and that assignation endures, it has value. You can dislike that outcome (hence your use of 'pretends') but so it is.
Bitcoin's premise on having any value is because it's rare and has a limited supply... a bit like gold ? This argument is totally flawed though. Just because there is a limited supply of my nasal hairs doesn't make them have an intrinsic value. Anyone in crypto is a fool and if they loose everything then that is just Darwins laws in action.
It is in fact your analogy that is entirely flawed in this instance. You speak of intrinsic value and such. Can you solve the double spend problem with your nasal hair? Can you transact your nasal hair digitally around the world in near real time? Bitcoin is almost perfectly finite (yes, its users could support a move to rise the cap in the same way as they could all choose to shoot themselves in the face). Gold has finite properties (albeit that they still keep finding the stuff and as the price of it goes up, there's an incentive to find more of it). You can't transact value in the form of gold digitally no more than your nasal hair.
Secondly, on the 'anyone in crypto is a fool' notion, as has been pointed out here many times Bitcoin ≠ Crypto. Most crypto projects will vaporize. Within crypto, you have scammers who haven't the least bit of interest in decentralized technology and are simply grifting and capitalizing on ignorance and hype related to a new technology. This has happened with other technologies in the past - albeit it's amplified in this instance given crypto is adjacent to money and money-like use cases.
This grift is being aided and supported by those who have taken the position that we won't apply any form of regulation because to do so is to give the sector legitimacy. It's easily verifiable that many good actors in the space have been lobbying for effective regulation (that doesn't attempt to destroy any such innovation) for a number of years already. Millions of people have opted to participate in these markets. They're worthy of basic protections and to deny that is a failure. You can't claim to be a champion of the little guy and then say do NOT regulate to stamp out fraudsters/curb grift.
You also have projects that started out in good faith but founders have now been drawn off course due to the $. With their heads turned, their projects are very imperfectly decentralized...although they may find use cases in the middle ground between centralized and decentralized.
There will still be projects in "crypto" that ultimately succeed but I would imagine those projects to represent a handful of the numerous projects that are in existence today. Having said all that, circling back, bitcoin ≠ crypto.
The dictionary gives two definitions of a bubble:
bubble
/ˈbʌbl/
noun
- 1. a thin sphere of liquid enclosing air or another gas.
- 2. used to refer to a good or fortunate situation that is isolated from reality or unlikely to last:
Bubbles of the second kind can last quite a long time. Our own nation lived in a theocratic bubble for about 70 years. I myself am astounded at the resilience of the bitcoin bubble. There is even a theory that its recurrent escape from certain demise means it is immortal.
ChatGPT on whether Bitcoin is a bubble ->
"Whether or not Bitcoin is considered a bubble is a subject of ongoing debate and largely depends on one's perspective."
So you're opposed to the idea of it, then its a bubble. You recognize the innovation in it, it's not. How many years ago was it that you said that you were astounded by bitcoin's resilience? Onward we go.
coinmarketcap.com
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/Bitcoins-price-history-4240814-V1-4efc2ab43fa7431ca4d112f6bf24bb04.png)
www.investopedia.com
indianapublicmedia.org
All those billions that the top tier banks have been paying for breaches in that regard? Admittedly they're only paying cents on the dollar though. And that's before we get to cash...which leaves no trace whatsoever.
I just threw it in there for fun to freshen up discussion on specific points that have been done to death.