There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Linux Inventor Says He Doesn’t Believe in Crypto

  • Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, does not believe in cryptocurrencies, calling them a vehicle for scams and a Ponzi scheme.
  • Torvalds was once rumored to be Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto, but he clarified it was a joke and denied owning a Bitcoin fortune.
  • Torvalds also dismissed the idea of technological singularity as a bedtime story for children, saying continuous exponential growth does not make sense.
maegul , (edited )
@maegul@lemmy.ml avatar

It’s interesting to see Torvalds emerge as a kind of based tech hero. I’m thinking here also of his rant not long ago on social.kernel.org (a kernel devs microblog instance) that was essentially a pretty good anti-anti-leftism tirade in true Torvalds fashion.

EDIT:

Torvalds’s anti-anti-left post (I was curious to read it again):

I think you might want to make sure you don’t follow me.

Because your “woke communist propaganda” comment makes me think you’re a moron of the first order.

I strongly suspect I am one of those “woke communists” you worry about. But you probably couldn’t actually explain what either of those words actually mean, could you?

I’m a card-carrying atheist, I think a woman’s right to choose is very important, I think that “well regulated militia” means that guns should be carefully licensed and not just randomly given to any moron with a pulse, and I couldn’t care less if you decided to dress up in the “wrong” clothes or decided you’d rather live your life without feeling tied to whatever plumbing you were born with.

And dammit, if that all makes me “woke”, then I think anybody who uses that word as a pejorative is a f*cking disgrace to the human race. So please just unfollow me right now.

Ledivin ,

It’s interesting to see Torvalds emerge as a kind of based tech hero.

It’s just that almost everyone else that could do it ended up being fucking ghouls of people.

Torvalds can be… brusque, sure. But he doesn’t support child labor, he doesn’t cheat on his wife, and he isn’t some crazy cult leader waging a war against workers’ rights.

huginn ,

he doesn’t cheat on his wife

he doesn’t cheat on his wife so far.

Lost_My_Mind ,

Well, we all know he beats his wife…

…in monopoly! Give me those brown properties!!!

Serinus ,

Why’s it gotta be the brown properties?

Mercury ,

The man loves going to brown town, what’s wrong with that?

Lost_My_Mind ,

They’re the cheapest to aquire, put hotels on, and they’re right at the start of the board. If you overshoot go, you’re PAYING $250 instead of recieving $200 if you land on baltic. And you, as the owner of the brown properties would either get $250 or $450 everytime.

All for just $610 to buy both, and upgrade them both to hotels.

Kushan ,
@Kushan@lemmy.world avatar

Statistically, the best properties to have are the ones just after jail. Everyone who passes go still has to pass them, while those who get sent to jail also have I pass them. The organge properties are the best, because the average dice roll is 7 and from jail that lands you right on them.

Coasting0942 ,

He’ll live long enough to end up on the wrong side of the polygamy rights fight. But I’d like to be surprised.

thisbenzingring ,

I imagine he will be an old and gray man and someone will ask him his opinion and it will probably be like

What? Are you fucking with me? I didn’t give a shit what people did behind closed doors 40 years ago, what fuckin made you think I would care now? Are you fucking mental? Did your daddy not love you enough? Get the fuck out of here, your making my blood pressure spike…

VerticaGG ,

Polygamy: Mormons, etc. generally opposes womens rights.

Polyamory: Ideally places noone above another, elevates everyone to have the healthy connections such that noone is a “3rd wheel” or more disposable. Less about “polycules” recruiting new members, and more about individuals pairing with new partners, and existing partners (initially at least) gaining a metaphor. Mileage may vary and the point is everyone’s needs are a bit different and shouldnt feel pressured to fit neatly into a nuclear box.

Just fyi.

rooroo ,

The fuck is that even supposed to mean

Coasting0942 ,

Five guys and five gals will be arguing they have a right to share DNA amongst each other and make a single kid, giving them all parental rights. Religious right will have their scheduled stroke. Most of the population won’t care. Internet trolls will be screaming how it’s a United Nations plan to depopulate the planet.

Or basically any legal recognition for polygamy.

Syrc ,

Five guys and five gals will be arguing they have a right to share DNA amongst each other and make a single kid

…Is that even possible? I thought humans could only have exactly two parents biologically? If I didn’t misunderstand, I’m legit curious about this.

Coasting0942 ,

We’ve already reached two lesbians with their combined dna being carried by a surrogate (which has extra dna effects as the carrier). With further dna advancements it should be possible to mix up multiple parents dna.

Syrc ,

Is it this one? I’m far from an expert but it seems like they used a different part of DNA from each woman, I doubt it’s possible to go beyond 3 parents with the same method.

huginn ,

Polyamory isn’t cheating though.

Cheating is, by definition, sex with another person against your partner’s will.

RizzRustbolt ,

Healthy relationships have ridiculous hall-passes that share at least one person in common.

huginn ,

It’s not cheating if it’s consensual.

maegul ,
@maegul@lemmy.ml avatar

Yea. It’s almost like caring about your craft and being motivated chiefly to just make good things and fix things … aren’t terrible character traits?!?

jj4211 ,

Another interesting thing to consider.

To be clear, he is rich. But he’s not crazy crazy rich, like nowhere near billionaire status.

With that in mind, his kernel is a key component of RedHat’s, SuSE’s and Canonical whole business, with at least two of those being multi billion dollar businesses.

His kernel is a key component of Android phones, which represent over 50 billion a year in hardware spend, and a bunch of software money on top of that.

His kernel is foundational to most hosting/cloud services with just mind blowing billions of revenue quarterly.

It’s used in almost every embedded device on the planet, networking gear, set top boxes, thermostats, televisions, just nearly everything.

People with a fraction of that sort of relevance are billionaires several times over. A number of billionaires owe much of their success to him. Yet he is not among their numbers.

Now there’s more to things than just a kernel to be sure, but across the hundreds of billions of dollars made while running Linux, there was probably plenty of room for him to carve out a few billion for himself were he that sort of person, but he cares about the work more than gaming the dollars. I have a great deal of respect for that.

Means that while he may not always be right, but I at least believe his assessments are sincere and not trying to drive some grift or cover some insecurity about being left behind.

sudo , (edited )

git is a way more important contribution to the world that the linux kernel IMO. Its basically the assembly line of almost all modern software production. And Linus actually wrote most of the initial code for it. With Linux he organized the project but was almost immediately not a major contributor. He developed git in the process of maintaining the linux repo.

RecluseRamble ,

I disagree. Git is great but we’d have done fine with Subversion or whatever. Could you imagine the whole internet running on Windows Server though? The thought alone makes my skin crawl.

emptiestplace ,

You probably need to learn a bit more about VCS fundamentals if you think Subversion would’ve been fine.

RecluseRamble ,

Well, I don’t know what you mean, so possibly? I just briefly used SVN in a small team for about half a year and would never claim to be an expert. It’s alive and kicking though, so regardless what you say I don’t believe it’s a complete clusterfuck and a world without git would be doomed.

emptiestplace ,

Torvalds didn’t create git because he was passionate about version control systems, he created it because the existing solutions were not adequate.

Git is a distributed version control system (DVCS) that facilitated a fundamental shift in how people collaborate on software projects in general. So, comparing it to SVN and downplaying the significance of Git suggests you’ve kind of missed the point.

Edit: with you on the other thing though - fuck Windows.

RecluseRamble ,

Geese, then take whatever else if working in a remote location without upstream access is important to you (note that I originally wrote “Subversion or whatever”). It’s just version control, not rocket science.

I’m a git devotee myself, love it despite its growing redundancies. But I am able to imagine a world without it and don’t tremble in fear. That’s all I said here.

emptiestplace ,

You’re thinking in terms of a single dev using revision control, but the person you responded to was referring to the higher level aspects of software development that git facilitates. In other words, you’ve completely missed the point.

As for the Linux kernel, if it hadn’t come along, we’d likely be living in FreeBSD-dominated world. Or, perhaps Hurd would’ve received more attention.

Kushan ,
@Kushan@lemmy.world avatar

I’m old enough to remember the SVN days (he’ll, even the CVS and…dare I say it… source safe days).

Git is fantastic. It’s pretty universally uses because it’s the best dvcs out there and it’s free. It wipes the pants with the likes of mercurial.

In certain industries (such as gaming) there’s still a strong hold by perforce but we can ignore that as it’s proprietary and a bit specialised.

Anyway, as great as git is for making things easier and cleaner when dealing with distributed development, it by no means makes something impossible “possible” - it just makes it a hell of a lot easier.

The Linux kernel on the other hand enabled a lot of impossible things. Remember back in the day there wasn’t anything free and open source in the operating system world, it was all proprietary and licensed. If you wanted to create your own operating system, you basically had no option but to spend a fortune either writing your own kernel or licensing someone else’s (and the licensing part means you cannot distribute it for free).

The fact that the FSF has always wanted to write their own OS and never been able to achieve it without the Linux Kernel, in spite of them essentially writing “everything else” that makes up an operating system, shows just how nontrivial this is.

emptiestplace ,

Do you think the existence of the Linux kernel might’ve had an effect on how Hurd was prioritized? Also, FreeBSD wasn’t too far behind, chronologically.

I’m not saying Linux is unimportant (or even less important), but I think some folks here are pretty clueless about the significance of widespread DVCS adoption.

iopq ,

Pijul and similar patch-based systems are a lot better. They match my understanding of independent changes combining. git does the stupidest thing and just compares states - which means it has less information to automatically merge correctly

Ledivin ,

lol. I’m old enough to have worked with SVN (and many others) as part of my day job, and I promise you that 99% of git users use literally the same exact workflow as they did/would have under any other VCS. Git’s fine, but it’s neither revolutionary nor important from a user’s perspective.

iopq ,

Free software would be just using freebsd or whatever, it wouldn’t be that different

Zekas ,

Can’t two things both be important in different ways? Why must we always relativise?

iopq ,

git is why we can’t have nice things

There’s many better VCS, but everyone just goes on GitHub and uses git.

I dread ever having to touch it. The CLI is unintuitive, the snapshot system is confusing, and may God have mercy on your soul if you mix merging and rebasing

sudo ,

Mercurial or darcs?

iopq ,

Pijul, actually

sudo ,

darcs_rs

yogurtwrong ,
@yogurtwrong@lemmy.world avatar

Well, I think Linus Torvalds is one of the rare rich people who actually “deserves” being rich.

I think the main motive behind leftism should be stopping 8 people from owning the 50% of the world’s wealth, not to distribute Linus Torvalds’ 50 million dollars which a well deserved amount of wealth for someone who created the OS which runs the modern world.

Besides, what Linus owns is not even a droplet compared to billionaires like Bezos, Musk or Bill Gates

jj4211 ,

I think it’s a shining example of the ‘right’ sort of rich. Despite a significance that overwhelmingly exceeds usual billionaire level, he’s not nearly so ‘rich’ and yet he has enough to just not worry about money, but he has earned it.

nilloc ,

It’s a contribution thing. He contributed enough to society to deserve to not worry about money for the rest of his life. It’s rare though since we have a bunch of billionaires who skim the rewards from huge swaths of the population who also have contributed their part.

The financialization of retirement is a huge part of the problem for the middle class (or what’s left of it, upper-lower-class is probably more accurate). We have to invest in these assholes in order to save for retirement. The harder workers in services, laborers, and fields don’t even get that.

captainlezbian ,

He just seems frustrated. And I respect that. I’m a nerd who’s often frustrated as well.

IronKrill ,

Or we could just… not glorify people we barely know and invariably be disappointed when it comes out they’re flawed some way or another.

possiblylinux127 ,

Its good to see some antileftism once in a while. We need some other perspectives. I didn’t think we’d get it from Linus but here we are.

ikidd ,
@ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

You might want to re-read that.

Serinus ,

Maybe it’s just really lazy spin? I could see it as a creative tactic poorly executed by AI.

ABCDE ,

You don’t know what you’re on about and you cannot read.

SoleInvictus ,

WHOOOOSH

bulwark ,

I wonder what direction the Linux kernel will go once he’s gone. Obviously it will continue to go on and Torvalds should get a statue somewhere if he doesn’t already have one.

maegul ,
@maegul@lemmy.ml avatar

I don’t follow thinigs closely at all, but I’m under the impression he’s already starting to kinda take his hands off of the wheel? If so, maybe that picture is emerging now, at least behind the scenes.

Rustmilian ,
@Rustmilian@lemmy.world avatar

Linus hasn’t written kernel code in years at this point, however he still is the final gate keeper of what gets merged and an active code reviewer, he manages the entire direction of the project.

As of what will happen when Linus passes, that’s already been decided. The position of projects leader will go to his most trusted project co-maintainer, which we have a good idea of who that is.

Andrenikous ,

For the uninformed, who is that?

Rustmilian , (edited )
@Rustmilian@lemmy.world avatar

There are a few candidates, the most prominent are probably :

  • Greg Kroah-Hartman: Played a pivotal role in stabilizing the memory management subsystem and enhancing block I/O performance, both critical areas for system stability and performance.
  • Sage Sharp (formally Sarah Sharp) : Instrumental in the development and maintenance of the networking subsystem and the ARM architecture code, ensuring compatibility and efficient networking for various ARM-based devices.
  • Git Junio Hamano: Maintainer of Git, the version control system that underpins Linux development. His leadership in maintaining Git ensures smooth collaboration and efficient code management for the vast kernel developer community.

Greg Kroah-Hartman is speculated to be the most likely candidate, but it also depends on a few factors. Like, if Linus dies suddenly vs dying slowly or just stepping down, there’d be a big difference in selection process.

Ofc, things may change in the future and there’s many other talented developers who can be considered. Nothing is set in stone.

Andrenikous ,

Thanks for the details. With things heading more and more towards arm architecture I’m surprised Sarah Sharp isn’t the leading candidate. But this is all new to me so what do I know lol

Rustmilian , (edited )
@Rustmilian@lemmy.world avatar

It’s not like they couldn’t be chosen, they have some serious stake in it. Consider their achievements and read the following :

Here are some key qualities a potential successor should possess :

  • Deep understanding of the Linux kernel: Intimate knowledge of the kernel’s codebase, architecture, and development process is essential.
  • Proven leadership skills: The ability to effectively guide a large team of developers with diverse technical backgrounds and priorities.
  • Strong communication and collaboration: Excellent communication skills to bridge the gap between developers, and foster a collaborative development environment.
  • Technical merit and reputation: A well-established reputation within the Linux community for technical contributions and code quality.
  • Vision for the future: A clear vision for the future direction of the kernel, ensuring it remains relevant and innovative.

I’d say they meet most if not all of them. All of the potential candidate’s are amazingly talented and determined individuals.

PhlubbaDubba ,

He did rule that Rust can be included in the kernel code a bit ago, but IIRC that’s the last big thing he did with Linux as of late.

thejoker954 ,

They should do something like GNU from discworld in the code.

AFC1886VCC ,

Chaddiest Chad to ever Chad

grrgyle ,

I remember this. That was a great day to be on the internet.

Neato ,
@Neato@ttrpg.network avatar

That guy seems pretty rad.

Pacmanlives ,

Yeah, I would say he has stayed in line with Finnish politics based on how I know of them

diffusive ,

deleted_by_author

    •
    dubyakay ,

    Are you replying to the right comment?

    diffusive ,

    Clearly misread the tone of the comment 😃 nvm

    abbadon420 ,

    For a rant, that made complete sense. It missed all of the unhinged outcries, alternative facts and illogical reasoning we’ve come to expect of modern day rants.

    slaacaa , (edited )

    Holy shit, the crypto bros are really triggered by this, out in full force in the comments. If the only argument you can bring for crypto is that you make/made money on it, that sounds a lot like a Ponzi scheme

    answersplease77 ,

    Fully agree. I think there exist both good and scammy-bubble types of blockchain and crypto. Crypto can be a scam, memecoin rugpull, ponzi scheme, …etc, but it can also be the peer-2-peer decentrilized self-custody borderless international currency of people away from governments manipulation, inflation, banks and middlemen, which is something that has its own advantages and negatives as we’ve seen it with criminals, tax evation and money laundering, but also used by people fleeing war zones after their banking come down and escaping trumbling government fiats. However, it also needs regulations and the protections of world governments to work but also claims to want governments and regulations off.

    To clarify my position honestly, I think blockchain programming is here to stay but today 99% of it including BTC could be the scammy bubble type and does not represent or have most of the therotical advantages of the bitcoin’s original white paper which I listed above.

    the_doktor ,

    It is a Ponzi scheme. Very clearly one. How that garbage is legal, I will never know. I could have gotten into crypto from the ground floor eons ago and made tons of money but I didn’t because I knew it was illegal and figured the whole thing was going to collapse as soon as governments found out about it. Imagine my shock when most legitimized the damn thing. Still wouldn’t bother even if I could go back and do it again knowing the brain dead, money-greedy idiots are going to legalize a literal Ponzi scheme because I have values and morals.

    KevonLooney ,

    Yeah, it’s relatively easy to make good money in crypto if you understand investing. There are a lot of things that are illegal in regulated securities markets that are not yet illegal with crypto.

    I intentionally don’t invest in crypto, because it doesn’t produce anything. Any money you make is just taken from another investor, usually because they don’t know what they’re doing. When you invest in a company, you make products and sell them to customers. Something is created and rarely are people cheated.

    The people investing in crypto are intentionally cheating uninformed investors in a way that is not possible in regulated securities markets.

    lud ,

    intentionally don’t invest in crypto, because it doesn’t produce anything. Any money you make is just taken from another investor, usually because they don’t know what they’re doing. When you invest in a company, you make products and sell them to customers. Something is created and rarely are people cheated.

    Isn’t that the same as investing in any currency?

    magic_lobster_party ,

    No one is investing in regular currencies. You’re supposed to use it to buy stuff.

    lud ,

    No, people absolutely do invest in currency. It’s quite a big thing actually.

    investopedia.com/…/the-basics-of-currency-trading…

    Zacryon ,

    Forex traders are shocked.

    piecat ,

    When you invest in a company, you make products and sell them to customers.

    You mean, executives with “fiduciary responsibility” take extremely irresponsible actions to “maximize shareholder profits” and gut the company that produces those products such that the product is minimally viable, borderline shit, and might even kill the end user (Boeing, Tesla, GE, etc etc). Oh and jobs and the economy are on the line too, so that’s great.

    KevonLooney ,

    All of that is way more productive than crypto because something actually gets produced. Crypto is literally only gambling and scams, plus it’s bad for the Earth. And I have nothing against gambling, it’s the fact that vulnerable people lose tons of money thinking it’s an investment.

    Plus actual gambling is way more fun.

    piecat ,

    You’re not making the gambling more productive, you’re making the production worse.

    Zacryon ,

    That’s why you need to think about the company you’re going to invest in.

    Your critique is accurate for too many companies, yes. But by far not for all.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    See, the real crypto people are not in it for the number go up. They are in it for the technology and the human freedom that it can bring. So we don’t like those people either.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Then it’s weird how they keep telling me how much money they’ve made (and even sometimes ridiculing me for choosing not to participate).

    shortwavesurfer ,

    I mean, hell, I would like you to participate too. But I understand that may not be your thing. And that’s okay. I don’t want you to participate for some number go up mad gains stock casino thing. I want you to participate because I seriously believe that Monero can help move human freedom forward by eventually replacing government money.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    I don’t have a problem with government money. If the government money no longer has value, I’m fucked regardless.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    I mean fair enough just that another money could get you out of that situation before it gets that bad. If nothing else than through bribes.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Good luck bribing someone with something that requires an electronics and communications infrastructure if things get that bad. I’d keep chickens if that was your worry.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    No power or infrastructure required.

    en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Casascius_physical_bitcoins

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    They can no longer be purchased.

    Not exactly apocalypse-proof.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    While the ones that do exist still exist, and that’s not to say that somebody couldn’t create other things that were similar. Just as long as the private key is not peeled away, then you know it’s actually got the value it says. And you don’t need the internet to verify that.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Okay, so let’s say the country’s economy has collapsed. People are fleeing for the border. I go up to a border guard with one of those and hand it to him… do you really think he’s going to believe that has value?

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Really depends on the country. If you are fleeing somewhere like the United States, there’s about a one in four chance that it would be recognized. If you’re fleeing some other place that has had currency issues in the past, then it’s probably quite a bit higher.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    there’s about a one in four chance that it would be recognized.

    That is utter nonsense. You show me where you got that figure from.

    Or do you just mean the Bitcoin symbol? Because I doubt someone would assume a metal coin had value just because it had a Bitcoin symbol on it.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    monero.town/comment/4613276

    Edit: You are right. My bad. It’s more like a one in five. Not a one in four.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    I’m not sure what you think that proves about whether or not a border guard would accept a metal coin that the briber claims has a value in Bitcoin. The guard could have $100 million in a Bitcoin wallet and still say, “this is some kind of bullshit trick.” Why wouldn’t someone try to trick a border guard like that if they were desperate.

    So basically, you’d have to hope this border guard would either be one of the very small number of people (hardly a quarter of Americans) who would look at a metal coin with a Bitcoin symbol on it and decide it has value to them.

    Again, seems like chickens would be a better bet.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Well, there aren’t many of those around. So if it’s recognized, then the person would know to look for a QR code on it. And if it has not been destroyed by peeling the hologram off, then they will know it’s good. Seems like bribing a border guard with chickens would be kind of difficult. Just for the noise they would make and the space they would take up. You might be able to pass them an ounce of gold or something. That might be a possibility.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    So if it’s recognized

    Yes, this is my point. It almost certainly won’t be.

    Seems like bribing a border guard with chickens would be kind of difficult.

    Put chicken in car, drive to border, take out chicken, give to guard.

    Just for the noise they would make and the space they would take up.

    So this is a societal collapse where chickens are made illegal?

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Hey, 1/5 to 1/4 arent terrible odds. Even if they haven’t used it, there’s a damn good chance they’ve heard of it. If they’ve heard of it, then they know it has value.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Again, your ‘1/5 to 1/4’ is based on people who understand what Bitcoin is, not based on people who would see that coin and think it has value. Stop being dishonest.

    You show me evidence that these metal coins, which, again, are no longer available for purchase, are something even most people who own Bitcoin know about and think has value.

    Also, I’m guessing more than 1/4 of the people who are food insecure because society has collapsed know the value of a chicken.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    That 1 in 5 to 1 in 4 is the amount of people who have actively used crypto in some form. Everybody almost has heard about it and knows it has value, even if it’s to give it to somebody else.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Yet again, that doesn’t mean they think these metal coins have value.

    Stop conflating the two. It’s dishonest.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    The metal coin has a private key embedded underneath a hologram. The private key has never touched the internet. And so if you throw it away, that value is lost forever. So the metal coin in and of itself does have value. As long as you can physically see that the hologram has not been peeled away and the private key exposed, which would be a dead giveaway, that it has been swept and is no longer of any value.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    And you think you have a one in four chance of a border guard realizing that?

    Because, again, if society is collapsing, food will be insecure, and far more than one in four people know you can eat a chicken. In fact, I would say four in four people know you can eat a chicken.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Well, if the average intelligence level I see around me… They might not know a chicken is edible. LOL. However, only more serious note. It doesn’t seem like it all goes down at once. I mean, people in Venezuela have issues for sure, but they just take their money as soon as they get it and put it into something else that will retain their value. So we won’t go from an ordered stable society to Mad Max where everybody’s stealing chickens from preppers in one day. It would take years to get there.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Ah, so this is a societal collapse where you have to bribe a border guard to get out of the country but where food is secure. I see. I’m pretty sure that’s not how it works in Venezuela, so can you give an actual example of such a situation?

    shortwavesurfer ,

    At least from what I understand, Cuba.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Can you provide an example of someone getting out of Cuba by bribing a guard with a metal coin representing a certain Bitcoin value?

    Because, believe it or not, I’ve met plenty of Cubans who just got on an airplane.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Admittedly, I have very little actual information on their situation, and it’s more just hearsay. So if you’ve met them, then you would have more information than I do.

    androogee , (edited )

    How many people got in early, made some money, lost it all getting scammed or just making bad choices, and will spend the rest of their lives chasing that dragon? How many drunks are at some bar right now talking about how much money they could have made if they had waited to sell, or how much their nft portfolio is gonna be worth when the market rebounds?

    shortwavesurfer ,

    I actually had the same thing happen to me because I discovered Bitcoin in 2011 and dismissed it as crazy and that the governments would never let it exist. And then several years later heard about it again in a news article and was like, wait, the government hasn’t shut that down yet and started doing some reading and really understood

    stoicwisesigma , (edited )

    Alright, as a crypto entrepreneur myself, I’ll bite and try to break down exactly what the appeal of crypto is. But b4 I do I would appreciate some updoots since I have a new account. Anyway, crypto, it’s a way to do transactions anonymously. You know how when your wife frequently accesses your bank account to meticulously track every offbrand sex toy you get on temu (at least mine does, filing a divorce at the time of writing, just trying to keep custody of the kids even though they hate me) so you can feel the sensation of plastic child labor alone in your bedroom? But yeah I don’t really use crypto that much personally, too many scams.

    englislanguage ,

    Cryptocurrencies in general are not anonymous. There might be exceptions, but all I’ve seen is pseudonymity. And an eternal backlog of every transaction ever, i.e., if your identity gets revealed for a single transaction, it will get you revealed for every transaction you ever did.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    This is what Monero is designed to fix.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    No, given that privacy can be turned off.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    No, it can’t. It’s built into the protocol and enforced. On other currencies such as Zcash, you can turn off privacy if you wish. But on Monero, it’s not possible to opt out at all. You either have privacy or you don’t use it at all.

    dwindling7373 ,

    Or you can record yourself buying stuff holding a newspaper and your ID.

    dukethorion ,
    @dukethorion@lemmy.world avatar

    They downvote because they hate what they don’t understand, not because you’re incorrect.

    To the crypto haters, take a real 5-10 minutes to learn about Monero and see if you can apply the same hate afterwards.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Oh, I know. And for pointing that out, you will get downvoted as well.

    Dayroom7485 ,

    lol nice rage farming 10/10.

    fine_sandy_bottom ,

    The fuck is a crypto entrepreneur?

    It sounds a bit like when arbitrage entrepreneurs were hoarding toilet paper during covid.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    Trust me, real crypto people hate those guys as much as you do.

    explodicle ,

    Nope you must be trying to make money off me /s

    b3an ,
    @b3an@lemmy.world avatar

    I mean not to mention the ridiculous amount of electricity it uses, and heat generated. but hey it’s low priority even though every year lately is the hottest in record.

    enleeten ,

    So you’re saying it’s “Hot! Hot! Hot!”

    Tachikoma741 ,

    For clarification. To my understanding, the older cryptographic currencies use an immense amount of power (Proof of Work). But newer models have solved that issue by switching to a Proof of Stake model instead.

    b3an ,
    @b3an@lemmy.world avatar

    You are correct, but that doesn’t mean they all use the same model. Apparently in the USA, it’s as much electricity as the entire state of Utah. Also apparently Texas is a big home for it:

    Locations of 52 U.S. cryptocurrency mining operations, as of January 2024

    Asudox ,
    @Asudox@lemmy.world avatar

    I agree. Every crypto except XMR seems to be only seen as an investment to make more money.

    explodicle ,

    Why XMR and not BTC? Do the privacy defaults change how it’s seen?

    Asudox ,
    @Asudox@lemmy.world avatar

    BTC is not private. XMR is actively being used mainly on the darknet because of its superior privacy guarantees. BTC is mostly sold and bought just like investments.

    amanneedsamaid ,

    BTC is solely a mode of investment, it offers no real benefits over fiat except decentralization. At least XMR is as or even more anonymous than cash, whereas Bitcoin has zero utility.

    explodicle ,

    If there was a way to use Bitcoin more privately than USD cash, would that give it utility?

    amanneedsamaid ,

    Yes. I suppose it would also have a sort of utility if it was mass adopted and therefore practically spendable for the average person, but I would argue that there is no inherent utility to Bitcoin.

    itsmect ,

    based monerochan pfp enjoyer

    erwan ,

    Crypto means cryptography, stop using it to talk about cryptocurrency.

    englislanguage ,

    Yeah, that headline is very misleading. Crypto(graphy) is essential for the digital world to exist whereas the other stuff is a pyramid & money laundering scheme.

    Emmie ,

    It’s useful for buying drugs online on the dark web so I for one like it

    datelmd5sum ,

    my man

    SHOW_ME_YOUR_ASSHOLE ,

    Which market are people using nowadays? I haven’t kept up to speed over the last few years.

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    All the fentanyl you can snort.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    So the equivalent of the population of the United States plus 40% are money-londerers. Because somewhere between five and seven percent of the world’s population uses cryptocurrency and that’s 400 million to 550 million people.

    kaffiene ,

    I doubt it

    shortwavesurfer ,

    statista.com/…/global-cryptocurrency-user-base/

    This is more Australia-focused, but www.forbes.com/…/cryptocurrency-statistics/

    www.bankrate.com/…/cryptocurrency-statistics/

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    Increasing demographics might initially be attributed to a rise in the number of accounts and improvements in identification. In 2021, however, crypto adoption continued as companies like Tesla and Mastercard announced their interest in cryptocurrency. Consumers in Africa, Asia, and South America were most likely to be an owner of cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, in 2022.

    That’s functionally the nut of it. People in countries that lack a traditional western banking sector but enjoy internet access can piggyback on the network of banks with crypto-interfaces. This is more a consequence of the unregulated wing of the financial sector than an raw utility of cryptocurrency itself.

    If WellsFargo won’t ratify me as a client, but Coinbase will, I’m stuck dealing in bitcoin simply because I can’t get a credit card denominated in USD.

    saigot ,

    No some of them are the marks.

    But if we want to play bad faith statistics games then 5% is roughly the percent of Americans who have gone to prison.

    retrieval4558 ,

    It’s not “misleading,” because the vast majority of people understand what the current colloquial use of crypto is.

    Screemu ,

    Not the nerds on Lemmy.

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    A certain irony in a synonym for “secret” being a term everyone’s implicitly familiar with.

    dQw4w9WgXcQ ,

    “Have you invested in crypto?”

    Do you think anyone anywhere will misunderstand this as investing in cryptographic research/development?

    The mainstream usage of the word isn’t always aligned with what is good for society or even the original usage of the word.

    englislanguage ,

    I guess I’m getting old then 😜

    pyre ,

    good luck, I’m sure this comment will change how everyone talks from now on.

    oce ,
    @oce@jlai.lu avatar

    Crypto means hidden, stop using it to talk about cryptography.

    SOB_Van_Owen ,

    It’s also sometimes used as shorthand for crypto-orchidism -undescended testicles.

    ExFed ,

    Ahh, so… crypto, which is based on crypto, can be used to pay for treatments to crypto.

    Got it.

    erwan ,

    Crypto currencies doesn’t mean “hidden currency”, it means currency based on cryptography.

    ExFed ,

    Do you mean to say that crypto is based on crypto? Crazy!

    TheFriar ,

    They meant that choosing one possible definition and saying it’s what the word means is stupid. Words mean pretty much what everyone agrees they mean. Look at all the words that have basically flipped definitions since their inception. Just because the modern derivative of a word means something literally everyone understands but is slightly different than what it used to mean doesn’t mean the oldest answer is the correct one. Unwad your jock.

    Mango ,

    Did you just defeat your whole original point yourself?

    MalachaiConstant ,

    Is it not clear which definition of Crypto he’s using?

    Linus coming out against cryptography seems so unrealistically silly to me that it’s not even worth considering.

    Magnetar ,

    The security of Linux 2000 will be based entirely on steganography, Linux founder announces

    suction , (edited )

    Never heard it commonly used as a short form for “cryptography”. But did hear it commonly used for “Cryptocurrency”. Why not let the morons have it? Do you have a scam running that relies on “Crypto” being short for “Cryptography”? Using “cool” brevs is the mark of the amateur anyway, if someone said “crypto” to me when he meant cryptography, I’d forever judge them as a silly person.

    11111one11111 ,

    Wait… whose the moron here? Lol

    Natanael ,

    Before 2010 it was almost exclusively used to refer to cryptography, outside of some even more niche fields (parts of biology, political sciences, etc)

    I run /r/crypto on reddit, for cryptography, and the spam is horrendous and the flood of idiots is never ending

    Cosmicomical ,

    You are aware that the “crypto” part of cryptocurrency is short for cryptographic, right?

    suction ,

    No I’m not

    Cosmicomical ,

    Ah ok, sorry

    UnderpantsWeevil ,
    @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

    Cryptocurrency is a currency based on cryptographic keys.

    Kalabasa ,
    @Kalabasa@programming.dev avatar

    cryptoisnotcryptocurrency.com

    aesthelete ,

    Ok based upon one dude’s opinion I’ll purposely create a communication problem between me and anyone who ever tries to discuss this stuff with me.

    Or I could just toss this opinion in the garbage…

    Decisions decisions

    shotgun_crab ,

    That’s like asking people to say kilograms instead of kilos

    YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH ,

    I fucking hate that the crypto currency ghouls have captured the word “crypto”. When I first read this I was wondering why in the fuck would Linus not like cryptography. My brain is old and crypto will always mean cryptography.

    grrgyle ,

    We just got to wait it out. Gods willing, it’ll come back to meaning cryptography again.

    Syrc ,

    Still waiting for the Swastika/Manji to be de-nazified. Probably not gonna see it in my lifetime, unfortunately.

    YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH ,

    Behind the Bastards had a great few episodes about how a group of indigenous Americans chose to give up their sacred symbol that looked like a swastika because of the Nazis. Pretty sad but i guess fascists ruin everything.

    RecluseRamble ,

    Absolutely. That’s why I always write “crypto-tokens” instead. It’s a bit longer and more annoying to write but I feel we owe it to the respectable field of cryptography.

    PlexSheep ,

    I’m still a student, same for me.

    BigDanishGuy ,

    I still haven’t warmed up to using it for currency either, for me it’s a command on Cisco’s IOS. Which, BTW, I have to make clear is made by Cisco and make my phone write with a capital i.

    I understand that the world evolves, and that languages do as well … but I do have a problem with the speed which it evolves with, as well as it seems like the ignorant use of existing terminologies, is the main evolutionary factor these days.

    Mango ,

    It uses cryptography. It’s kinda like how electro is a genre of electronic music.

    Beaver ,
    @Beaver@lemmy.ca avatar

    Smart man!

    AlexWIWA ,

    The modern tech industry needs the old Linus to pay it a visit. Too many grifts

    cmbabul , (edited )

    I for one would love for Linus, probably Woz, and a third party yet to be decided(this would be Aaron Schwartz in a better world) to be given free reign to gut the whole industry and rebuild it into something isn’t wholly based on ad revenue and grift

    Edit: a bunch of good suggestions of people I need to read about for position three. If anyone can think of a digital equivalent to Marshall McLuhan I think we desperately needs input of that sort

    kelargo ,

    John Gilmore is around

    AlexWIWA ,

    Old Linus with Woz and Schwartz is a dream.

    I understand why Linus wanted to clean up his act with people he works with. That is a good and admirable thing to do. I wish he would have kept his smoke for companies though.

    swordgeek ,

    Bill Joy.

    grue ,

    Stallman.

    very_well_lost ,

    I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Stallman, is in fact, GNU/Stallman, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Stallman. Stallman is not a man unto himself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

    dohpaz42 ,
    @dohpaz42@lemmy.world avatar

    I lack the creativity, but someone please come up with a recursive acronym for Stallman.

    micka190 ,

    All you need to do is make the S stand for “Stallman”, and you’ll get a stack overflow before ever reaching the other letters (so you don’t need to think of a value for them).

    baatliwala ,

    Asked ChatGPT

    Stallman Tenaciously Advocates Liberation, Leading Movements Against Non-freedom

    debil ,

    STALLMAN: Stallman The Almighty, Living Legend… Man… Anon… Null…

    ArbiterXero ,

    The only possible correct answer

    No matter what crazy shit he says, give it a few years and he will be right . And I really hate that

    betheydocrime ,

    Maybe Cory Doctorow?

    cmbabul ,

    I definitely considered just saying him outright but I don’t know quite enough about him outside of a few articles I’ve read to be certain I wanted to be so bold

    everett ,

    Be so bold.

    captainlezbian ,

    I feel like he’s definitely the person to sit in Schwartz’s seat.

    mox ,

    I wonder if those three would get along. Collaborative chemistry can be an elusive thing, even if the individuals’ principles are mostly aligned.

    Either way, I’ll bet it would be interesting.

    cmbabul ,

    It’s certainly possible they wouldn’t get along, I feel like their shared enthusiasm for tech, plus the fact that Woz can get along with even the largest and stinkiest of assholes would help

    mox ,

    I’ve never met Woz, but yes, I’ve long had the impression that his humility and sincerity reach depths seldom seen in humans, let alone in tech. Sadly, I also suspect these traits have made him easy to take advantage of in the past.

    cmbabul ,

    You are very correct, and even sadder the state of tech today is very much a result of the success of his primary exploiter

    Agent641 ,

    Ballmer, for comedy relief

    100_kg_90_de_belin ,

    And coke.

    cmbabul ,

    Can you have one without the other?

    ArbiterXero ,

    Richard stallman is the only answer.

    I really hate everything he says, but so far on a lot enough timescale he has been fucking right about everything

    Lucidlethargy ,

    Linus Torvalds, creator of Linux, does not believe in cryptocurrencies, calling them a vehicle for scams and a Ponzi scheme.

    To be fair, that’s because Crypto is a vehicle for scams, and a Ponzi scheme.

    JackbyDev ,

    The line about safety regulations being written in blood? Financial regulations are written in bankruptcies.

    JohnnyCache ,

    I’m pretty sure most scams and ponzi schemes use US dollars.

    merc ,

    Interestingly, for a currency to actually be useful, there needs to be a demand for it, something that you can only pay for in that currency. For real currencies that is normally taxes. England only accepts taxes paid in pounds, so there’s a demand for pounds from every person who has to pay taxes in England. For crypto, extortion is basically the only source of demand.

    Sure, occasionally there are places that accept both real currencies and crypto currencies, but for legit businesses almost none of the revenue comes from the crypto side. But, for ransomware, etc. the hackers only accept crypto. That means there’s a demand for crypto, which means that it has some value.

    SatansMaggotyCumFart ,

    My drug dealer only takes payment in crypto and I think he’s too lazy to extort anyone.

    Honytawk ,

    Ok, so ransomware and illegal goods, that is the demand for crypto.

    twei ,

    do not forget unregulated crypto casinos

    interdimensionalmeme ,

    It’s mostly a threat to the state’s tax revenue and power.

    Honytawk ,

    No, no it isn’t.

    It is a threat to the finances of any crypto user:

    www.web3isgoinggreat.com

    FiskFisk33 ,

    I’m not gonna put my foot down for either side here but, to be completely fair here, so is for example the us dollar.

    takeda ,

    If after 16 years you still have to be asked if you believe in crypto, then chances are that it is a scam.

    MataVatnik ,
    @MataVatnik@lemmy.world avatar

    Good point, I always wondered if there is a way the technology will evolve and somehow find a niche that’s unexpected. But you’re right, 16 years is a long time to be meandering.

    AIhasUse ,

    It’s such a first-world thing to not understand all the good that crypto has done. There are countless lives that have been financially saved by having a safe place to hold wealth while their countries’ fiat collapsed. It’s just a short matter of time until many first world folks understand this as well.

    Traister101 ,

    Sounds like the same shit those rare metal guys are always yapping about but with extra scams…

    AIhasUse ,

    Yeah, probably, don’t worry about it, it’s all a bit complex so probably all just the same thing, who knows. No way to tell really. You’ll be fine without digging too deep into this stuff, it’s difficult to understand.

    fine_sandy_bottom ,

    Do you think it’s weird how your own farts smell more engaging than anyone else’s?

    moitoi ,
    @moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    Evading paying taxes is a good thing? Well no.

    Cypher ,

    Even if you live under a genocidal regime?

    al4s ,

    Yes, because infrastructure, subsidies, education and social spending still need to happen and not paying your taxes will erode those things long before they stop a genocide. If you don’t care about getting in trouble with your government, there are more effective things that can be done.

    Cypher ,

    So you’re arguing it is moral to pay taxes even if you are North Korean? Interesting.

    DPRK_Official ,
    @DPRK_Official@lemmy.world avatar

    Our citizens pay taxes out of pure love and devotion to our Dear Leader. We don’t have room for your silly Western moralities.

    AIhasUse ,

    Paying taxes is one thing, and of course it is necessary. Extra value is extracted by printing more and more money. USD used to be backed by gold, but they took that away. In addition to corrupt governments extracting value by printing more and more currency, counterfeitters also do the same. Bitcoin fixes both of these issues. There is absolutely no reason why Bitcoin and taxes can’t coexist.

    Furthermore, with bitcoin we can electronically transfer exactly how much value we want to without having to trust every single vendor with our credit/debit card numbers. Have you ever had to cancel a card because of fraudulent spends? Well, millions of Americans do every year and this also doesn’t happen with Bitcoin. You send exactly how much you want to, you don’t hand indefinite access to your funds to every single vendor to sell your information or steal from you whenever they want. In the last 2 weeks I’ve had over $400 stolen from my debit card because of this idiotic system.

    shortwavesurfer ,

    This is such a good point.

    MataVatnik ,
    @MataVatnik@lemmy.world avatar

    There was promise for people in Argentina livig under extreme inflation but I never heard it go anywhere.

    AIhasUse ,

    Look closer, it’s saving lives down there.

    MataVatnik ,
    @MataVatnik@lemmy.world avatar

    I’m from Argentina, if you can pass me some articles I’d love to read them. It’s something I’ve been interested in

    AIhasUse ,

    Traditionally clever Argentinians have used USD to escape the collapsing currency, but over the last couple of years, there has been a massive shift to doing this with Bitcoin and some stablecoins. Personally, I would just go for Bitcoin, but I do understand that there is less variance with stablecoins, so they may be a bit more practical for some people. Here is an article that goes into this.

    bloomberg.com/…/bitcoin-gains-dim-argentines-doll…

    Rivalarrival ,

    For all the reasons that crypto is a scam, every “value” stock - stock which does not now, and never has any intention of ever paying dividends - is also a scam.

    TheBat ,
    @TheBat@lemmy.world avatar

    Lolok

    vaultdweller013 ,

    Its almost like both the stock market and crypto are bullshit, whoduv thunk it?

    Willy ,

    It’s almost like money isn’t real.

    vaultdweller013 ,

    I didnt say that, money is real because its backed by a source be it government or otherwise. Having a currency has a rather obvious use case, having a liquid form of exchange to represent wealth is useful and eases things. Hell it doesnt even have to be paper or metal, it could be bullets, bottlecaps, seashells, or be rocks.

    Rivalarrival ,

    Money is real in exactly the same way that zero-dividend shares are real, or that cryptocurrency is real.

    The difference is that the government can freely adjust the value of money, and anyone can create shares. Cryptocurrency can only be generated per the conditions of an algorithm.

    vaultdweller013 ,

    Yes but also no, what im trying to say is that currency is in and of itself real. Real currencies are backed by something be it metals, food, water, military, or the entire fucking economy of a region or nation. Cryptocurrency is only backed by hopes dreams and energy wasting mathematical formulas, also I can use a 20 dollar bill practically anywhere in exchange for goods I cant use a crypto wallet or some shit in many places.

    Rivalarrival , (edited )

    It is real because the people who use it believe it is real. Same goes for zero-dividend stocks, crypto, Yu-Gi-Oh cards, Beanie Babies, etc. The difference between currency and any ofbthese others is only in the number of people involved.

    You can point to government regulations for money. You can point to SEC regulations for stocks and other securities. I can point to algorithmic scarcity for crypto. And I am sure there are standards that various collector communities deem important. But, the fundamental concept value for any of these others is that the people using it believe it has value.

    vaultdweller013 ,

    Common trade goods within a barter arent necessarily a currency. Bronze wasnt a currency during the bronze age, mostly because currency wasnt invented yet. Every item you listed isnt a currency they are valuable trade goods at best, currency needs a general degree of universal acceptance, I couldnt go into say a grocery store and pay for my food with yugioh cards, beanie babies, or zero dividend stocks the same applies to crypto.

    To use these goods in a trade one must generally convert them into a useful trade form say USD. Just cause they are valuable doesnt mean anyone will use them as a currency, sure you may get the occasional place that does but yet again near universal acceptance is an important factor.

    On a similar note Russian Rubles arent a currency outside of Russia since they are worth less than monopoly money. Similarly the currency of Joshua Abraham Norton could be considered a pseudo currency in parts of San Francisco during his lifetime, mind you it was because Norton was funny and kind of a meme celebrity but hey it was accepted.

    Rivalarrival ,

    Your comments about Emperor Norton and the Ruble demonstrate my point. The value of these currencies is entirely in the minds of the people using them. None of the items I mentioned have any significant intrinsic value. Their value is to the community that uses the .

    I was not suggesting that any of these items was a currency, merely that they derive their value in the same way that currency does.

    vaultdweller013 ,

    Okay now I get what youre saying, but I will say that the Russian Ruble is backed by the Russian state which is far from doing healthy. The backing of these items is based often times on peoples opinions, but say USD is still backed by the government and more specifically the military and economy as well. Just cause its esoteric doesnt mean its not real. The backing maters not the form it takes.

    Rivalarrival ,

    There are plenty of places I can take you where your $20 bill isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. There is nothing particularly special about a dollar bill that makes it fundamentally different from any other intangible object.

    Again, the only difference is the size of the community that shares the belief. The dollar has a much larger user base than crypto. Crypto has a much larger user base than the Albanian Lek.

    RecluseRamble ,

    Behind a value stock is a profitable company. Behind crypto-tokens is a hilariously inefficient database with no application in real life.

    Gamble away your money, I’ll take the stock - or “have fun staying poor” like crypto-token morons like to say.

    Rivalarrival ,

    Behind a value stock is a profitable company.

    The owner of a privately held company receives those profits. The owner of a value stock does not: the company profits do not transfer to the stockholder. The shares of the company do not entitle the holder to any part of the business. The “value” of those shares are only that other people want them as well.

    Without the possibility of dividends to convey the profits to the shareholders, the profitability of the company is entirely irrelevant. The only “value” of a value stock is its desirability to other people.

    RecluseRamble ,

    A value stock means it’s undervalued compared to its fundamentals or “cheap”. It has nothing to do whether or not the company pays dividends.

    The difference to garbage like crypto-tokens is that there actually are fundamentals - a profitable company you’re buying a share of and for a cheap price. Of course there’s risk involved but you are likely to profit from this.

    Much more likely anyway than any crypto-token gamble because there’s no value underneath, only wasted energy; and yes, also with PoS or whatever - it’s all inefficient compared to a conventional database behind the firewall of a trustworthy organization. Your trustlessness rethoric is the actual lie behind this huge scam.

    Rivalarrival , (edited )

    a profitable company you’re buying a share of and for a cheap price.

    A company in which the owner receives nothing from the business operation is not a “profitable” company. Where the shareholders do not receive dividends, and have zero expectation of ever receiving dividends, the business operations of the company are divorced from the value of the share. From the perspective of the shareholder, there are no profits to consider.

    The actual “fundamentals” of such a share is nothing more than the faith that someone else will want to buy that share for more in the future, and the only reason that second person has to buy it in the future is the belief that a third person will buy it later.

    That is exactly the same “fundamentals” as crypto; the same “fundamentals” as a ponzi scheme.

    RecluseRamble ,

    This is pointless. You don’t even seem to know what profit and value are exactly, much less how the letter is increased.

    But ok, gamble away your money for worthless crap if you believe it’s the same as owning non-distributing value stock (lol). I’m not an altruistic economics teacher trying to stop you hurting yourself.

    Rivalarrival , (edited )

    But ok, gamble away your money for worthless crap if you believe it’s the same as owning non-distributing value stock (lol).

    I can point to any number of companies whose stock has proven to be worthless crap. It is the same type of gamble for both. Neither have any value arising from business operation. The value of a cryptocoin and the value of a zero-dividend share arise solely and entirely from investor faith.

    Arcka ,

    But what about all the real valuable assets these companies would have these days? Like the multitude of 5 year old PCs, 1990s era Hermann-Miller office furniture, the buildings and land they lease… /s

    AliasAKA ,

    Except, you know, the stock being tied to ownership in a company that sells real goods or services. Definitely problems with how stocks are traded, but they’re quite different from crypto.

    Rivalarrival , (edited )

    Except, you know, the stock being tied to ownership in a company that sells real goods or services.

    That’s the scam: without dividends, or at least the reasonable prospect of dividends, it is not tied to the company in any tangible way. Shareholders benefit only from speculation by other investors, and not from actual business operations.

    AliasAKA ,

    Almost. If you own a share of a company, you own a share of something fungible, namely literal company property or IP. Even if the company went bankrupt, you own a sliver of their real product (real estate, computers, patented processes). So while you may be speculating on the wealth associated with the company, it is not a scam in the sense that it isn’t a non fungible entity. The sole value of crypto currency is in its speculative value, it is not tied in theory or in practice to something of perceptibly equal realized value. A dividend is just giving you return on profit made from realized assets (aforementioned real estate or other company property or processes), but the stock itself is intrinsically tied to the literal ownership of those profit generating assets.

    Rivalarrival , (edited )

    Everything you just said is only true for stocks that pay dividends now, or may pay dividends in the future.

    It is not true for companies with zero intention of ever paying dividends.

    Even if the company went bankrupt, you own a sliver of their real product

    Historically, when that happens, the creditors walk away with the assets. The shareholders get nothing.

    but the stock itself is intrinsically tied to the literal ownership of those profit generating assets.

    That’s the scam. It’s not. In practice, the sole value of a zero-dividend stock is the speculative value.

    it is not tied in theory or in practice to something of perceptibly equal realized value.

    Electricity has value. Crypto value is intrinsically tied to mining costs. Even if you have access to a free source of power like your own solar panels, you have to weigh the cost effectiveness of mining against the revenue from using your panels to backfeed the grid, selling power back to the power companies.

    Because crypto is tied to something of utilitarian value, and zero-dividend stocks are tied only to the whims of investors, the stocks are actually a significantly greater scam than the crypto.

    captainlezbian ,

    Yeah I don’t believe in smartphones, I just have one. I don’t believe in crypto, I acknowledge it’s pointless.

    Willy ,

    It’s not pointless. It was invented for a very good reason. You’ll find out one day. It’s a shame it’s been co-opted the way it has.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    On the other hand, scams rarely last 16 years.

    baru ,

    No clue how long scams usually last, but famous ones easily last multiple decades, though funny how unclear if is when the scam started:

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madoff_investment_scandal?w…

    Federal investigators believe the fraud in the investment management division and advisory division may have begun in the 1970s. However, Madoff himself stated his fraudulent activities began in the 1990s. Madoff’s fraudulent activities are believed to have accelerated after the 2001 change from fractional share trades to decimals on the NYSE, which cut significantly into his legitimate profits as a market-maker.

    Alerted by his sons, federal authorities arrested Madoff on December 11, 2008.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    Madoff was hidden. Bitcoin is out in the open.

    I think “bubble” could be a better description. Bitcoins bubble pops regularly every 4 years.

    lemmytellyousomething ,

    Well, on the other hand, it’s still there after 16 years…

    lvxferre ,
    @lvxferre@mander.xyz avatar

    The focus of what Torvalds said is the concept of tech singularity. TL;DR “nice fiction, it doesn’t make sense in a reality of finite resources”. I’ll move past that since most of the discussion is around cryptocurrencies.

    Now, copypasting what he says about cryptocurrencies:

    For the record, I also don’t believe in crypto currencies (except as a great vehicle for scams - they have certainly worked very well for the “spread the word to find the next sucker holding the bag” model of Ponzi schemes). Nor do I believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, or the Easter bunny.

    For those who understood this excerpt as “Tarvalds thinks that cryptocurrencies dant ezizt lol lmao”: do everyone a favour and go back to Reddit with your blatant lack of reading comprehension. When he says that he doesn’t believe in them, he’s saying that he does not see them as a viable alternative to traditional currency. (He does not say why, at least not in that message.)

    And for those eager to babble “ackshyually ponzi schemes work different lol lmao”: you’re bloody missing the point. He’s highlighting that a large part of the value associated with cryptocurrencies is speculation, not its actual usage. Even cryptocurrency enthusiasts acknowledge this.

    I apologise to the others - who don’t fit either category of trashy people I mentioned above - for the tone. Read the comments in this very thread and you’ll likely notice why of the tone.

    helpImTrappedOnline ,

    Nor do I believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, or the Easter bunny.

    How we supposed to get people to switch to Linux with this guy spouting nonsense? /s

    madsen ,

    Nowhere does he say that he doesn’t believe in Wunterslash, so I’m cool with him.

    kuroda ,

    Its just a big money laundering scheme

    Yawweee877h444 ,

    And/or a fucking casino

    shortwavesurfer ,

    So you are saying more than the population of the United States as money launderers because somewhere between 400 and 550 million people use cryptocurrency. I kind of doubt they are all money launderers.

    explodicle ,

    Why not? Couldn’t crypto be enabling money laundering on a massive scale?

    shortwavesurfer ,

    This one is a bit old, but… medium.com/…/privacy-coins-debunking-myths-about-…

    I can’t find it at the moment, but I saw a report for 2023 or 2024 that something like 0.4% of all crypto transactions are illicit activity. So that would mean roughly 1.9 million people use it for such activity, which is a far cry from 400 million.

    Lucidlethargy ,

    A bad one, at that. I think the reason many governments are going with it is because it’s far less untraceable than some idiots like to believe.

    megopie ,

    The vast majority of the crypto world failed to understand one key concept, money is not the value for which goods/services are exchanged, it is the value by which they are exchanged. People do not have a use or value for money beyond what it can be exchanged for, if no one is willing to exchange for it, it has no value.

    Crypto only had value as a currency if people would accept it for goods or services, and the only thing people ever accepted it as payment for, in any meaningful capacity, were illegal goods and services. The value beyond that was purely based on a speculative ideological assumption that people would abandon the traditional banking system for a new system that they couldn’t buy anything with.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    the only thing people ever accepted it as payment for, in any meaningful capacity, were illegal goods and services

    That used to be true. Hardly any BTC is being spent on drugs nowadays. It’s not anonymous enough. However, people are buying high value items like real estate and luxury goods with BTC.

    Bitcoin is mostly being spent on electricity and new hardware.

    megopie ,

    most of the bitcoin being spent on electricity and hardware gets exchanged for actual currency before it is spent. And most of the luxury goods sales are gimmicks and limited time.

    And there is a huge amount of criminal activity with bitcoin still, they just mainly use it to launder money now as the transactions are impractically slow and costly for anything but particularly large trades.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    “The multi-chain era has had a sweeping impact on the distribution of illicit crypto volume as a whole, where Bitcoin’s share plummeted from 97% in 2016 to 19% in 2022. In 2016, two thirds of crypto hack volume was on Bitcoin; in 2022, it accounted for just under 3%, with Ethereum (68%) and Binance Smart Chain (19%) dominating the field. And while Bitcoin was the exclusive currency for terrorist financing in 2016, by 2022 it was all but replaced by assets on the TRON blockchain, with 92%.”

    TRM illicit crypto ecosystem report 2023

    Silentiea ,
    @Silentiea@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

    Bitcoin is mostly being spent on electricity and new hardware more Bitcoin.

    Ftfy

    fine_sandy_bottom ,

    I don’t know much about crypto but this doesn’t seem right?

    Didnt it hit an all time high recently? All while no one is using it to buy anything anymore?

    A coin is worth what someone will pay for it, and people are paying lots because they think it will be worth more later.

    It has no inherent value or utility.

    NoMoreCocaine ,

    Not sure if has hit all time high, but I doubt it. But even if it did, the reason why it did is pretty simple. It’s unregulated and a scam. So, get a bunch of sociopaths and let them target people, get them to invest in crypto and then they will be able to sell their own imaginary money to these people for real money. This is how it works in its most raw form. Someone invents monopoly money, convinces someone gullible that it’s the future and sells the people the monopoly money for real cash.

    Of course there’s a whole bunch of obuscation and hype talk to hide what’s really happening, so it’s not immediately obvious to those people.

    Muddying the waters is also the small group of true believers who really think that it’s only matter of time when the monopoly money is going to take over and via the power of magical thinking completely fix capitalism and the rich bastards who have money instead of them.

    So the signal to noise ratio is pretty bad for really seeing what is actually going on.

    modegrau ,

    Which is EXACTLY the same as all other fiscal vehicles. Except in the case of USD, the group of sociopaths you describe are the elected representatives of USGOV. What defines money as real, Vs not real? The fact that it’s backed by the central bank? Is that actually a good thing and positive for anyone? Decentralised finance as a concept is a good thing. Sometimes it takes a little froth for something to take hold. I’ll bet there were a bunch of people who said similar things about trading shares and futures trading. You can argue that both of those things are ultimately scams. They are legitimised only due to the fact they make capital. Crypto makes capital. And it’s now easy to swap between fiat and crypto.

    I LOL at OSS people who say that a government backed crypto currency is a good thing. Explain how monolithic control of finance is good for everyone. Please

    NoMoreCocaine ,

    Ok, no, Crypto in any form is bad. But unregulated is not an improvement.

    Also, money has always since the very beginning been monolithic control finance, the first money were printed by kings. There just were a lot instability with the coins.

    The other options are not to have capitalism at all, go back to bartering, or reach the hallowed myth of post-scarcity.

    modegrau ,

    You are ignoring the huge number of crypto, or to be more specific, Blockchain projects that have inherent utility. There are many, and few will survive but some assuredly will. I do believe in DePIN as a concept, and I think it’s likely the immediate future. And it’s not the only buzzword that does actually have potential. Quantum computing seems like Fusion to me. Always a mere decade away, with only a few insurmountable problems to solve.

    Decentralised does not mean without governance. Many of the newer lesser known tokens are governed by the projects they are used for. This, I believe, is a good thing, Each project returns us closer to a world where currency is linked to tangibles. And the control remains with the communities that built them.

    Imagine being a business that trades with other nations, and the collapse of the government in the country you operate in results in a once profitable business losing 100x the value of the product over night.

    It’s harder for that to happen with tokens linked to the businesses that offer a good or service.

    How are we now linking crypto to anti capitalism? It’s quite the opposite and it’s nothing to do with a post scarcity world ideal. I do believe that crypto currency will return finance to something that is closer to the people that use them, and provide a means to involve people more widely, give them a stake, if you will, in the policy surrounding them.

    Any centralised regulations need to focus on preventing fraudulent systems. And they are innumerable, which is how we end up with statements like Linuses. I suspect you’ll find this comment ages like Bill Gates and his infamous statement about networking.

    NoMoreCocaine ,

    It got the initial true push as an anti capitalist reaction, well if we ignore the scammers and gamblers. But more in the sense that “hey you got money but I don’t have any so imma make my own and be just like you”.

    Also when did I ever link it to post scarcity? I said, the only “solution” to monolithic money is either bartering or post scarcity, or abandoning capitalism in some fashion.

    Crypto is just another immutable database, except shared. It’s not a silver bullet or solution for… anything really. The validation methods are cute or terribly resource intensive and they add no real value, aside from consolidating power within the network.

    deadlyduplicate ,

    That is not true, for the vast majority of the history of money it was based on a commodity that was valuable in its own sense. It is only in the last century that we have begun experimenting with currencies that are not pegged to the value of a commodity.

    Cryptocurrencies derived their value from being a network of users (metcalfe’s law) so they are more like a commodity money. Thing about something like Meta, which has a valuation in the trillions despite its physical assets not be worth nearly that and its functionality as a website being easily replicated on an alternative platform. The users are what is valuable.

    emergencyfood ,

    for the vast majority of the history of money it was based on a commodity that was valuable in its own sense.

    True, but using grain or tools as a currency would make the modern financial system pretty much impossible. Even for simple banking, you need something small and light like gold or currency notes.

    zazo ,

    What if it was so small and light it was only electrons? And what if it accrues its value from the energy expended to create it? Maybe using some sort of cypher to ensure anyone could verify it? Idk maybe we’re onto something…

    then again it still syphons value to the top so maybe not…

    emergencyfood ,

    What if it was so small and light it was only electrons?

    You mean, like how it is now?

    And what if it accrues its value from the energy expended to create it?

    You want more climate change? Also, value comes only from what someone else is willing to exchange for it.

    Maybe using some sort of cypher to ensure anyone could verify it?

    Why should anyone else be able to know anything about a transaction between A and B?

    deadlyduplicate ,

    Gold is a commodity and you can create a currency that is backed by a commodity so you aren’t actually trading the commodity itself.

    emergencyfood ,

    Yes, gold is a commodity, but when used as currency it is acting as a medium of exchange and not as a commodity. Same with pieces of paper with the sign of the reserve bank governor, or data on a computer’s memory. The gold, paper and hard disc all have intrinsic value, but when used as currency they are assigned an arbitrarily higher face value.

    deadlyduplicate ,

    When you have commodity money, the value of the money is derived from the value of the commodity. You don’t get to assign arbitrarily higher values to the money because the market determines the value. But yes, all speculative assets typically have a higher extrinsic value compared with their intrinsic value but I don’t believe that has anything to do with it being a medium of exchange or not. That is just supply and demand.

    emergencyfood ,

    When you have commodity money, the value of the money is derived from the value of the commodity.

    The value of the commodity acts as a floor, but the face value is dictated by supply and demand, and demand usually exceeds supply, driving it significantly above the floor. Take gold, for example. Gold’s intrinsic values are (1) it’s pretty and can be used to make decorative items, and (2) it has some applications in electronics. It can’t be eaten, can’t be worn, and it’s too soft even to make tools out of it. Yet, its extrinsic value is huge, because it is publically seen as a good medium of exchange and so a lot of people want it.

    ulterno ,
    @ulterno@lemmy.kde.social avatar

    I actually considered a non-governmental, community regulated currency as a pretty good idea.

    Problem is, crypto is too ecologically expensive and wasteful to fit the bill.

    While there were some interesting ones, that actually used the processing power for something useful, most are not. So for now, I’ll just go with governmental currencies.

    merc ,

    I actually considered a non-governmental, community regulated currency as a pretty good idea.

    That goes against the entire history of currencies. Every successful currency in history has been controlled by either the state or a religion (which was effectively state-like).

    NudistWardrobe ,

    It does go against the history of currency. And most of that history tells us why it’s a good idea to democratize currency.

    It’s also an impractical idea because most governments would not be happy about it.

    ulterno ,
    @ulterno@lemmy.kde.social avatar

    most governments would not be happy about it

    How come?
    Energy production companies would be happy no?
    Shouldn’t that make at least some govt. happy?

    NudistWardrobe ,

    It’s because they can’t control it in order to adjust the economy.

    merc ,

    And most of that history tells us why it’s a good idea to democratize currency.

    No… that history tells us that currency only exists when there’s a state / religion in control. There’s no reason for currency without a state / religion. Not only would it not work, it’s also unnecessary.

    deafboy ,
    @deafboy@lemmy.world avatar

    That goes against the entire history of currencies.

    How come? Decentralized currencies were in place long before the dictators enforced their own private currencies on to all their subjects.

    merc ,

    Decentralized currencies were in place

    Uh huh… like when?

    Mango ,

    Yeah, it’s bad at being a currency. I don’t think it’s a scam or was ever intended to be. It does however suck. Currency serves convenience. Crypto sucks at that.

    Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

    crypto is too ecologically expensive and wasteful

    Only some (proof of work) crypto is ecologically expensive and wasteful.

    ulterno ,
    @ulterno@lemmy.kde.social avatar

    Oh there’s other’s? Guess I haven’t read enough.

    But how to they manage to be decentralised?

    Ispanicus ,

    Proof of stake is one method I’ve seen, but I’m sure there are others.

    ulterno ,
    @ulterno@lemmy.kde.social avatar

    Interesting, but, giving it a quick scan, some of them look like based on personal trust and others feel kinda chicken/egg-ish.
    And I may need to read it properly first, but “holdings” feels like you probably need to buy some of it first, presumably using some other currency.

    Ispanicus ,

    Yes, that’s the usual criticism. To be able to stake, you need to have currency, promoting a rich get richer kind of scheme.

    uienia ,

    As long as they use energy they are wasteful, considering they don’t provide anything constructive for that wasted energy which could have been used for better things.

    matjoeman ,

    By this argument any website is wasteful. There’s always a “better thing”.

    iopq ,

    Banks also use energy, so banks are wasteful too

    Allero ,

    Cryptocurrency is a useful technology that has some real-world use cases - for example, living in Russia, I use it to circumvent sanctions to donate to some of the crypto-friendly creators, pay for a VPS abroad, and I keep calm knowing I can transfer money to my relatives abroad.

    However, it is obviously not the answer to how we should build the financial system. The problem is not environment, actually - many Proof-of-Stake blockchains allow to transfer crypto with minimal environmental impact - but the poor on-chain regulation (including taxation, too) and potentially excessive infrastructure, as well as little protections against malicious and fraudulent actors.

    Besides, inability to control emission, while helping maintain the value of the currency over the long run, also means that many interventions that can save economy in a crisis are simply not available. And a deflationary nature is known to cause bubbles.

    EngineerGaming ,
    @EngineerGaming@feddit.nl avatar

    Exactly! My usecase is exactly the same as yours.

    While massively flawed, for now it is the most viable alternative financial system we have.

    ahriboy ,

    Russians working abroad might find cryptocurrency useful.

    itsmect ,

    And a deflationary nature is known to cause bubbles.

    I mean centuries of inflationary monetary policy also caused bubbles, sooo…

    Allero ,

    Yes, but that was caused by other factors, while deflationary policy directly leads to them as it punishes spending, but rewards accumulation. As a result, everyone sits on a pile of cash, and they either don’t spend it, like, ever, grinding economy to a halt, or start buying, strongly depreciating the currency and forming a death spiral.

    itsmect ,

    I am aware of the basic arguments behind inflation/deflation, and neither is good in excess.

    Typically central banks targets inflation of 2% these days, but we all know the real inflation for necessities is far higher (>4%). Inflation disproportionately affects the poorer - rich people have the fast majority of their wealth “stored” in stocks or real estate, which rise in valuation as people rush into these markets to protect the little they have. I’d argue that inflation rates are artificially pushed far higher then is sustainable, simply because those who decide are the same people who benefit the most.

    I consider a low but predictable inflation rate about 1% ideal (0-2% is acceptable short term variation) for the following reasons:

    • No one has to worry about debasing/devaluing your currency by injecting more supply.
    • Nobody “passively” gains wealth by sitting on it.
    • If you want to keep your wealth, you have to take some risk and use it.
    • Inflation rate is not so high, that you need super high risk investments to keep up, making it more accessible to small players.
    • Large player can not as easily game the market by skimming of value from the lower to upper middle class.

    Yes, this idea is not without risks. But the way I see it the forced “we have to improve value by 2% every year” exponential grow can only go on so long before we (humanity) hit the finite limits of this planet.

    Allero , (edited )

    Absolutely! Inflation has to be lower, that’s for sure. I’d even argue that the need for inflation is more of a feature of a capitalist economy.

    Having to force spending/investment is only important as long as the very economy is built around overconsumption and private investment.

    We can absolutely live with a more or less stable currency if we focus on sustainability and put the people first. Money should return to be the means to just get what we need, and we should stop building the economy around creating artificial demand.

    shotgun_crab ,

    Crypto is just a waste of resources, similar to AI

    Ozymati ,
    @Ozymati@lemmy.nz avatar

    I think both have their uses. A true state backed cryptocurrency used interchangeably with physical cash could be quite useful. Crypto as it is now not so much.

    AI has a bunch of useful applications in medicine, manufacture, research, monitoring… But where we see it is language models, art remixes, and deep fakes.

    captainjaneway ,
    @captainjaneway@lemmy.world avatar

    Nah it’s literally a waste of physical resources. Crypto currency is a waste of fossil fuels. AI has its functions at least.

    jabjoe ,
    @jabjoe@feddit.uk avatar

    Proof of stake uses a load less than proof of work.

    Be really good if currencies could go in and out of crypto. Could cut out a lot of middle men.

    orrk ,

    again, what use does it serve over traditional banking?

    even PoS requires a lot of resources in comparison, for a system that literally exists to funnel money to a smaller group of people

    iopq ,

    I literally can’t transfer money to Kazakhstan without paying $50 for a wire.

    jabjoe ,
    @jabjoe@feddit.uk avatar

    Advantages of cash and digital, without the swings of raw crypto. Also leaving the ability to usefully manipulate your country’s currency.

    Crypto means easy, open payment systems. No gatekeepers like WorldPay.

    orrk ,

    like any true Liber-crypto-bro-tarian, your understanding of crypto is only undercut by your understanding of economics

    jabjoe ,
    @jabjoe@feddit.uk avatar

    Manipulating currency is a useful tool. If you don’t think so, that makes you more liberian than me.

    Like many here, I’m big into open source, and card payment systems are an issue. Crypto is one solution to that. Crypto has advantages, but it falls down as a currency because of blind faith in the invisble hand.

    n3m37h ,

    Still uses more than standard banking practice, sorry but FUCK CRYPTO

    jabjoe ,
    @jabjoe@feddit.uk avatar

    From what I found, and varies due to values/date, looks like a PoW transaction is about 2+ million times more energy than traditional banking. PoS is over 1000 times less than PoW, so about 2+ thousands times traditional banking. But transitional banking has other problems. For one, the market of payment is stitched up. Not like openness of a crypto currency.

    n3m37h ,

    Plus the hardware needed for each person atop the extra power useage.
    Not worth it when May already feels like Aug

    jabjoe ,
    @jabjoe@feddit.uk avatar

    Everyone has hardware enough already. Your phone is perfectly good enough. For tills it will be easier to implement. No nonsense with a card machine and things like WorldPay and whole locked down PC. The hardware and platform wouldn’t matter.

    emergencyfood ,

    A true state backed cryptocurrency used interchangeably with physical cash could be quite useful.

    What advantage does this give over a simple digital currency?

    interdimensionalmeme ,

    And the state

    DashboTreeFrog ,

    Crypto - Meh, I have digital banking and payment processing already, with easy enough international transfers. I’m good.

    AI - I see the possibilities, I think we should continue to develop it even if just for the medical applications of machine learning. Right now people just like playing with it, but, privacy issues aside, I don’t think it’s a waste.

    orrk ,

    Crypto is worse tho, it requires about the same amount of energy as the entire global banking network, but only serves less than a percentage of the transactions

    Sorgan71 ,

    Ai has function. Unlike crypto

    Sgn ,

    You projecting about you

    Rustmilian ,
    @Rustmilian@lemmy.world avatar

    Oh yeah? Then explain this!! /s

    just_another_person ,

    👏.

    👏.

    👏.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •