Buy bitcoin, bro

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 8 points 6 hours ago

forced to drive to work vs leisurely taking the bus to go on an adventure

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 6 hours ago* (2 children)

    Pro Tip: build a time machine, travel back to 2009, buy $100 worth of bitcoins at $0.00076 each, sell in 2013 at $1000 ea (roughly $130 million).

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 hours ago (1 child)

    If you travel back that far, there's no need to buy them. Just start mining them. It was super easy at the beginning. I kinda wish I hadn't been so lazy back then and done it myself.

    Besides, I'm not sure there even was $100 worth out there available to buy at that price.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

    For every person that gets a payday from crypto there’s probably 50,000 that lost money. It’s just gambling.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago* (3 children)

    Unless you mined bitcoin instead of trading it - especially early on, when it was practical on a simple home computer. People were essentially plucking money out of thin air.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 11 hours ago (2 children)
  • [–] 159 points 17 hours ago* (3 children)

    "A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation.”

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago

    I’m so lucky that my work gives me a free public transport pass. It’s 25 mins from my door to the office with 10 of that being walking. I still have a car, but I dont need it for most days. Plus it would cost me like $180/month for parking at my work’s building. Hard pass.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 11 hours ago

    Public transit is generally faster than driving around in big cities, especially places like NYC and Boston (at least when the T is actually operating as-intended).

    Hell I live 45 miles away from my office and most days it is faster to do train-->subway-->half mile walk.

    To these types of people, especially...time is money. You would think they would prefer public transit just for the time efficiency...or at least invest in it just to reduce the amount of traffic they have to deal with on the roads.

    You don't even see Musk riding around on a goddamn Segway. Which actually turns out to be a somewhat common Mandela effect, because I had to look it up to find out he didn't actually invent/start Segway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 9 hours ago (1 child)

    It's a much more valuable vehicle he's ridding on the "after" picture.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 11 hours ago

    Bitcoin as a pathway to wholesale adoption of mass transit?

    I am forced to extend critical support

  • source
  • [–] 65 points 16 hours ago (21 children)

    Saddens me that crypto is now about investment/gains instead of being improved as a fair, decentralised, convenient, fast, secure money system.

    Looks like we will have to stick to the banks and their bullshit yet after all.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

    I loved the idea of crypto. There was even a niche but growing Crypto Leftist movement, creating tech/apps to help the working class (Breadchain), but in 4 years they built basically nothing. Then just fucking everything else got captured by VC money, big tech, and institutions. It's just capitalism 2.0 now. It's such a shame.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 hours ago* (1 child)

    IMHO the problem crypto leftists have had is that our implementation choices generally ignore the "decentralized" requirement to avoid difficult economics problems. We try things like having nonprofits checking IDs, or creating yet another money supply so we can pay the devs from it, or recreating treasury bonds because it looks greener.

    What we need isn't "open source money, but generous". We need to build a new economy outside the old one, and what we're selling won't shoot to the moon overnight. While we can contribute useful tools, we aren't the architects of that future and can't be in charge even for now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 6 hours ago*

    IMO the goals of leftists within crypto is:

    1. protect the unbanked, underbanked, and even banked from the exploitative financial system: we’re making progress. There's is demonstrable proof of this. Even just the base protocols (Bitcoin, Ethereum) offer real relief from tradfi. A very simple example is sending aid to Gaza.

    2. remove US hegemonic power by undermining the dominance of the US dollar: we’re making progress, but some things like USDC are actually reinforcing American dominance. The influx of institutions into the crypto space has really undermined this.

    3. move away from capitalism and asset speculation to collective ownership (governance tokens), trade of useful goods (digital or physical), and savings protocols: we’re not making very much progress and are actively moving against this. This is where Breadchain / Bread Coop comes into play. There's so much potential, and some things have been built ... but overall it's been slow and big disappointment as we watch Capitalists actively co-opt crypto. The amount of scams, VC vaporware, rugpulls, casino games, etc seems to grow by the day. I truly believe there's genuine use cases out there, but crypto right now is mostly just ultra-capitalist speculative garbage.

    It's been sad to see crypto leftists like Joshua Davila (author of Blockchain Radicals) move away from crypto and pivot into AI. sigh

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

    The real value Bitcoins tech brought us is immutable ledgers. We need our money to go through immutable ledgers.

    There would be no "release your tax returns," itd be public domain.

    We need that shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • Yea, that's one of the few good things that cryptostuff and the Blockchain.

    That and the fact that you could, theoretically, do implementations that are actually progressive (instead of regressive), and where the ones that actually deserve rewards are the ones who get that (sort of a "Proof of Contribution" or a "Proof of Value": if you actually add value and contribute to make things better, yoy get rewards, but if you're only a leecher, then you get punishments, sort of torrent now that I think about it; but if you're poor, you don't have to contribute that much or nothing at all, because any difference is acceptable only if it favors the least advantaged, and favoring them is precisely what it means to contribute and add value).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

    When was it not?

    People only complained they didn't get in before 2016 so they could be rich.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 14 hours ago (1 child)

    I remember the moment it clicked for me that this was the case. In early 2018 I overheard my roommate listening to a Bitcoin podcast hosted by people I understood to be prominent members of the community. They were trying to justify why it was a good thing Steam no longer accepted Bitcoin to purchase games. I couldn’t see a single upside to a currency, whose purpose is to be exchanged for goods and services, no longer being accepted for a good. I thought about the large amount of crypto the podcasters likely held and how they were probably trying to keep other people in to keep their own crypto worth more. But if the people near the helm were no longer able to admit when something is wrong, then the dream was dead, crypto was dead to me, and I stopped getting more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 24 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

    Using slop to make fun of crypto certainly is a weird choice. They're very much adjacent.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 7 hours ago

    Not on crypto but on both stock and commodity trading. My risk averse friend asked me how much I lost. I didn't tell him it's quite big but something I could tolerate 😅

    My normal investments are fine for the long term, but yeah, I've got losses on my trading. I refined my strategy and studied Peter Lynch's growth investment philosophy. Sure enough, it worked by picking only stocks with the biggest market shares, does not receive any attention, competent leadership and excellent financial fundamentals that point to high growth.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›