/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>53522948
Based. I heard china dedicated a complete nuclear plant to bitcoin mining now. God i love the chinks.

>>53522948
yea dude, this is gonna make us rich!

>>53522969
considering a vast majority of shitcoins did not make a new ath this bull run: yes. now if anything high up the ladder has no actual backing of value: its ETH. nothing has more backing of value than bitcoin in crypto. finally, china really no longer has such a big role in mining as they used to.

>>53522948
Why doesn’t my car triple in value from consuming energy?
Checkm9

>>53522948
If you spend $100 on a single walnut, that doesn’t make walnuts worth $100 it makes you a gullible retard.

>>53522948
>>53522986
>>53522992
>>53523060


BTC and PMs are backed by a universal commodity (energy) in almost the exact same way. 1 BTC is backed by the energy it took to mine it in the same way that a bar of gold embodies the energy it took to extract it from the earth. This is what gives both assets inherent value -- you can transfer the stored energy each asset represents to another party in exchange for their energy (in the form of a product or service). No debt is involved when energy is exchanged for energy. This is what makes them stronger monies than fiat, the exchange of which for goods or services represents a promise to pay based on a promise to pay based on nothing.

ETH has already achieved intrinsic value. ETH is backed by a new commodity we can call "access to (decentralized) computational resources". All market participants using Mainnet need to pay for their computations using ETH, and thus demand for access to decentralized free markets is thus what gives the asset its real, non-speculative buy-side pressure. Do we expect this demand to decrease or increase as time passes?

Price discovery on ETH is price discovery on the value of one's ability to use Mainnet for market activity.

>>53522948 (OP)
>>53522986
>>53522992
>>53523060


BTC and PMs are backed by a universal commodity (energy) in almost the exact same way. 1 BTC is backed by the energy it took to mine it in the same way that one bar of gold embodies the energy it took to extract it from the earth. This is what gives both assets inherent value -- you can transfer the stored energy each asset represents to another party in exchange for their energy (in the form of a product or service). No debt is involved when energy is exchanged for energy. This is what makes them stronger monies than fiat, the exchange of which for goods or services represents a promise to pay based on a promise to pay based on nothing.

ETH has already achieved intrinsic value. ETH is backed by a new commodity we can call "access to (decentralized) computational resources". All market participants using Mainnet need to pay for their computations using ETH, and demand for access to decentralized free markets is thus what gives the asset its real, non-speculative buy-side pressure. Do we expect this source of demand to decrease or increase as time passes?

Price discovery on ETH is price discovery on the value of one's ability to use Mainnet for market activity.

>>53522966
Thought they banned it

>>53523240
Don't care. I will crush your pow with my mighty nucular capacity. Please pay us in fiat currency.

>>53523330
Only for private use. State is mining more than ever.

>>53523060
>doesn't understand basic supply and demand

>>53522948
>not backed by anything
>not backed by a self-appointed, self-interested cabal
po-tay-to, po-taa-to

>>53523359
There is no demand for walnuts, chud.

>>53522992
Because you can keep making a theoretically infinite amount of cars.

>>53523380
yeah well if THATS the backing you want instead of proof of work then enjoy your 95% purchasing power decrease of the dollar the last 100 years

>>53523411
>Because you can keep making a theoretically infinite amount of cars.
There are not enough commodities fpr that. Steel, Aluminium etc
>>53523411
>still using US Dollars
N G M I

>>53523240
so far, the TRIPPLE HALVING isn't really causing much price action. so i would say the results are in. even eth's "tripple halving" won't do as much for price as bitcoin's halving.

>>53523334
Hi XI, good to see you. How will you go about financing all of your big, scary infrastructure? Who are your financiers? Who lends you your fiat currency, and what's your relationship with them? From whom do your lenders receive their power over you?

Or are you your own lender; is your snake eating its tail? If so, how do you expect markets to weigh your currency and its value in the long run (or over, say, whatever length of time you give yourself to pay off your loans)?

>>53523434
Has demand for computational resources on Mainnet picked up? By many metrics, it seems to have declined dramatically as market participants fled these networks last year. Why would we expect price action on this resource in the absence of greater demand? If anything, the current relative stability of valuation indicates that some kind of a balance has been reached (i.e. that the price of ETH given the current number of Mainnet users has been more or less discovered). This balance is temporary, of course. I don't hold any significant position in ETH, but it's necessary to understand what really gives these things value if one is going to use these networks for market activity.

>>53523240
The labor theory of value is stupid. If I spend a year painting a portrait of Donald Trump and someone else spends a year developing a functioning fusion reactor, are they worth the same because they used the same amount of energy to create? Of course not. Value is subjective, everywhere and always. It has nothing to do with energy input.

Furthermore, the idea of "backing" comes from paper money that is redeemable (hence "backed" by) some fixed amount of a commodity (almost always a precious metal). Backing has nothing to do with how much work went into producing the monetary unity or how much military power the issuing country has. Unless a dollar or a bitcoin are redeemable in a fixed quantity of a certain fungible commodity, they are not in any meaningful way "backed".

>>53523705
Hi Ben. Nice to see you. How if we substract -500 from your social credit score while we wait for the police to come to your door to bring you to the nearest gulag?
To answer one of your questions: Crypto will be pegged to the yuan as your dollar implodes further. Lithium was first. Then we pegged OIL. Next it will be bitcoin and gold. Sorry - no dollar for you.

>>53523705
And by the way: Please stop maxing out your credit card on hookers and blow.

>>53522948
I used to think that the costs associated with mining can definitely be offset by the rewards that mining provides. However, I think that there are some serious long term concerns about the sustainability of mining and the environmental impact or that's what the chink govbt is wanting to believe. As of now im seeing a lot of switch towards reward driven coins and tokens that don't need to rely so hard on energy consumption to still offer value. There was a thread the other day about an insider talking on slack with chinese whales about investing on bluechips (ETH) and new coins (HAMI) to bolster their numbers
idk, 'tis weird this bullrun

>>53524088
You couldnt build a new nuclear plant even if you wanted to. Have fun freezing poor ameritard.

>>53522948
this would only be true if you could convert bitcoin back into the electricity, which isn't the case. if you spend a million dollars searching for gold and only manage to acquire 1gram of gold through this operation, then this 1g of gold still won't be worth a millions dollars.

>>53523240
Completely retarded.
Value is subjective.

>>53523411
There’s literally an infinite amount of fake magic internet beans with stupid brand names
My car actually has utility

>>53522948
it's backed by electricity

>>53523724
>>53524184

What commodity backs any fiat currency, and what is the fixed rate at which it can be exchanged for this commodity? Maybe an answer can be something like oil in a roundabout way and in some instances, but I'll reiterate: no debt is involved when energy (captured in a commodity backed money) is exchanged for energy (captured in a good or service). It stands to reason that the energy found on either side of an exchange like this keeps our scales in relative balance, which is why market participants would pay say 0.01 BTC for your painting, and 1000+ BTC for your fusion reactor. Did those two goods take the same amount of energy to create? Can we expect these goods to command the same amount of energy at the market?

>>53523798
Nice to see you too. Tell me -- how will you go about paying for your gulag services? Who will finance them, and how secure is this financing? Further, if your currencies will be "pegged to BTC and gold", how do you think more discerning market participants have positioned themselves in anticipation? How will debts be re-denominated, and where will liquidity start to pool as a result?

>>53523983
>credit
Debt is slavery; those who live within their means cannot be liquidated so easily.