/biz/ - Business & Finance

Define future utility - imagined or otherwise

>>7173447
I know it has. You think that'll stop me from trading?

>>7173469
The value stemming from utility, free of speculation. What is there to define?

>>7173640
>I know it has.
Why? Your Dunning-Kruger delusions are not an argument.

>>7173699
Because most coins are fucking useless and still have market caps of up to hundreds of millions of dollars.

>>7173945
Fuck off, obviously I'm talking about the ones that are not useless.
>hurr durr not worth hundreds of millions of dollars
Why? Give me a convincing argument or show me the math, else you can fuck off, faggot.

>>7174104
>What if speculative price has already surpassed future utility value of crypto?
"Crypto" doesn't have a price and it also doesn't have a utility value.
Your questions is worded so retardedly, it could mean any fucking thing, so no it's not obvious you meant the ones that are not useless.
Don't blame me for your own stupidity. It's telling how you can only answer in insults.

No man a glorified barcode scanner warrants an 800 billion dollar market cap

>>7174213
>doesn't have a utility value

>>7174283
lol

>>7173447
there's no middle ground because of the very limited supply. Either Bitcoin turns out to be a fad and slowly bleeds to 0 or it will be adopted as a currency/store of value. And since there's only 21M coins the price has to be over 100k to accommodate reasonable amount of people.

>>7174323
What is the price of crypto, you genius? Tell me that.

>>7174467
>price of crypto
A point where supply and demand of a certain (crypto) asset meet in an equilibrium state.

>>7174459
Why does it have to be Bitcoin? There are multitude of coins that can do everything Bitcoin does and do it better.

>>7174515
Crypto is not one coin, you faggot, it doesn't have a price. I already told you you worded your question retardedly.
When people say crypto they mean the whole market and as I said the majority of the market is ridiculously overvalued.

>>7173447
aha ya duh it has

>asked to be shown the math
>cant even do it himself
>Im not a brainlet, your the brainlet for now showing me the math
kek

>>7173447
Doubt so, transactions run through smartcontracts is interesting in a lot of different sectors.

>>7174213
There's a global marketcap for crypto.

>>7174582
your just salty cuz our monopoly money is worthless

>>7174582
>Crypto is not one coin, you faggot, it doesn't have a price.
I never said it was you absolute fucking brainlet. Who was reading comprehension? Don't even reply to me with your retarded semantic shitposts.

>>7174598
I am not making any claim, brainlet.
>>7174610
I agree fully, but can we somehow estimate the value of smart contracts for example?

>>7174459
>Either Bitcoin turns out to be a fad and slowly bleeds to 0 or it will be adopted as a currency/store of value

somehow, couple of retarded libertarians with lousy economic knowledge persuaded lot of ppl that "currency" that literally has all the wrong properties for being a currency is worth investing

le great ponzi

>>7174699
What "wrong properties" prevent crypto from being a better alternative to fiat?

>>7174735
being deflationary
being slow
not enough incentive for miners
storing all of the fucking transactions on a ledger
creating economical superelite of early adopters with majority of hashrate

>>7174789
also, I was talking about bitcoin

probably 99 percent or all of other crypto is fucking useless shit

>>7174669
>speaks like a retard
>gets upset when he's misunderstood
You said crypto has a price. Only single coins have prices. So again, what is the price of crypto? Give me a number.
If you meant market cap you should have said market cap. No, it's not the same and it's not semantics.
If you want people to understand you use the right words, you brainlet.

>>7174789
>being deflationary
Not universally true.
>being slow
Lie.
>not enough incentive for miners
Lie and PoW is obsolete anyway.
>storing all of the fucking transactions on a ledger
Why is that an issue?
>creating economical superelite of early adopters with majority of hashrate
So one elite replaces another. A bummer.
>>7174822
>also, I was talking about bitcoin
Not technologically relevant.
>probably 99 percent or all of other crypto is fucking useless shit
>probably
So you just admitted you know nothing about crypto. Thanks for wasting my time replying.

>>7174857
>You said crypto has a price.
Anyone but an absolute autist like you understood that I meant crypto assets in general. Kys.

>>7174822
https://twitter.com/ummjackson/status/958924420625481730

>>7174625
>I never said it was

>What if speculative price has already surpassed future utility value of crypto?

>of crypto?

>>7174884
How it is not relevant idiot? I was quoting line about bitcoin u fucking blind faggot

>>7174928
Great argument. Convincing math. Thanks, just sold 100k.
>>7174938
>?
I am asking a question in the hopes of get the discussion going, you faggot. I never once stated my opinion itt on whether crypto is or is not overvalued with its future value in mind.
>>7174958
>how is myspace of crypto no relevant hurr durr u idiot

I think what is actually happening is whales are literally just cashing out from ICOs. If the amount of real money put in is really 20bn then it is going to be continually drained.

i hope i am wrong

>>7175004
are u retarded?

all of theese:
>being deflationary
>being slow
>not enough incentive for miners
>storing all of the fucking transactions on a ledger
>creating economical superelite of early adopters with majority of hashrate

applies to bitcoin

Tell me about any single one crypto with any use whatsoever so I can tell you why u are wrong

>>7174938
Misunderstood your retarded post. Crypto = crypto assets. Kys autist.

>>7175060
I don't give a shit about your bitcoin strawman, faggot. This is the last (you) you get from me.

>>7175119
what bitcoin strawman? you are legit retarded I WAS LITERALLY RESPONDING TO POST ABOUT BITCOIN HERE YOU FUCKING DENSE DELUDED FAGGOT

>>7174699

>>7175163
Alright, I admit I misunderstood your post to be a description of cryptocurrencies in general.
But since
>Tell me about any single one crypto with any use whatsoever so I can tell you why u are wrong
My point stands. Kys, retard.

>>7174916
>hurr durr you know nothing about crypto
>confuses price and market cap
>doesn't know difference between crypto and crypto coins
>gets butthurt when he doesn't get the answer he wants
Kek.
>Fuck off, obviously I'm talking about the ones that are not useless.
>Anyone but an absolute autist like you understood that I meant crypto assets in general. Kys.
You're contradicting yourself again. So which is it? I already told you most coins are overvalued. So in general "crypto" is overvalued.
I'm not even arguing against crypto. I know that a few coins will make it and become much more valuable.
But you talk like a brainlet and start insulting when people don't understand your brainlet talk.
If I could quote a very bright gentleman
>Your Dunning-Kruger delusions are not an argument.
Next time use the correct terminology and clarify if someone doesn't understand instead of acting like an arrogant faggot.

>>7175248
>My point stands. Kys, retard.
because there is none?

>>7175254
Next time use the correct terminology and clarify if someone doesn't understand instead of acting like an arrogant faggot.

This

>>7175254
>>confuses price and market cap
>>doesn't know difference between crypto and crypto coins
Where?
>most coins are overvalued
Yes, they are. Most of them are indeed worth $0. I don't know who is the brainlet here if you need a clarifying that I had not Bazingacoin in mind when typing the OP.
>Next time use the correct terminology
Since when is "crypto" not acceptable on /biz/?
>Next time use the correct terminology and clarify if someone doesn't understand instead of acting like an arrogant faggot.
I agree that I should have refrained from namecalling, no matter how frustratingly detrimental your first post was as a contribution to the discussion I tried start. You have my apology for that.
>arrogant faggot.
>I know it has
Talk about arrogance.

>>7175499
>Where?
>Crypto = crypto assets
Crypto refers to the entire crypto market. Thus it includes every fucking coin, even Bazingacoin. That's also why it doesn't have a speculative price.
>Most of them are indeed worth $0.
If you think that why did you get so butthurt when I said
>Because most coins are fucking useless and still have market caps of up to hundreds of millions of dollars.
You're saying the exace same fucking thing. But you still answered
>Fuck off, obviously I'm talking about the ones that are not useless.
>hurr durr not worth hundreds of millions of dollars
>Why? Give me a convincing argument or show me the math, else you can fuck off, faggot.
Whatever, pal. If you enjoy your threads turning into utter shitshows keep arguing the way you are.
If not just explain what you meant exactly if you're being misunderstood.
>I know it has
Wow, you're browsing 4chan and this mundane little sentence has triggered you that much?

>>7174669
>can we somehow estimate the value of smart contracts for example?
I thought that was more or less your question in the OP, not exactly smart contracts, but everything "future". Something that I've read in XMR threads are estimations about how a 1% penetration (I'm not saying it has to reach that) in the global drug trade would affect XMR's current marketcap and I think if you look at the utility every coin can bring, while obviously accepting that some coins deserve to die, the end result will painta a good future. I'll admit I haven't done the math, it's going to need guesswork, but you could try to look at the current volume of interbank transactions and think about how much transactions or volume would need to go through smartcontracts for the current marketcap to double.

>>7175824
No I do not enjoy threads like these, and I am at fault that it turned out like this, but please do not act as if it's my fault only. You made some idiotic assumptions (purposefully, if I had to bet) about my posts and then exaggerated your defense on the basis of supposedly unclear semantics.
>>7175935
Agreed, no doubt crypto tech has a bright future. For utility tokens (especially REQ comes to mind) it might actually prove quite simple to calculate it's future value based on the captured market share. With coins it seems impossible to estimate future value, now that I think about it.

This is why I bought link, best chance to add utility to crypto

>>7175331
>>7174916
>>7174669
>>7174598
>>7174610
>>7174213
>>7174104

>>7176428
Second lieutenant here.

It was used as a "storage of wealth" for a while. It hasn't been a viable way to make purchases since early 2017. We'll see it get to sub $1000 and then stabilize again between $1000-$2000 for a while. I hope you have a job or other reliable way of acquiring fiat because early 2018 is going to be a fire sale of prices.

>>7173447
highly possible but then again, it's a fucking currency dude. That has unlimited potential.

>>7176647
I personally don't own Bitcoin and never has. I think it's a dead project and a big tumor on the crypto market. Ethereum is at this point more or less detached from BTC. If Bitcoin ever falls that low, Ethereum will flip it and alts will most likely be traded against Ethereum mostly and so will recover sooner rather than later.