Memes

45737 readers

19 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml

sexy_peach@feddit.de

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

I hate these icons (gregtech.eu)

submitted 2 months ago by gregor@gregtech.eu to c/memes@lemmy.ml

145 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] CynicusRex@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

”Do you disagree with their reason?

Responsible financial diversification requires holding some assets outside of the traditional government controlled banking system.

They didn’t say they were going all in. They aren’t continuously promoting - at least not that I’m aware. They were just being open and honest about how they’re handling their finances.”

I absolutely disagree.

“Responsible” and “Bitcoin” is an oxymoron due to the inherent multi-level marketing pyramid/Ponzi scheme aspect of crypto“currencies”.
“Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely.
Disregarding all of bitcoin's shortcomings, a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won't change the world for the better.” —https://www.cynicusrex.com/file/cryptocultscience.html

[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

“Responsible” and “Bitcoin” is an oxymoron due to the inherent multi-level marketing pyramid/Ponzi scheme aspect of crypto“currencies”.

First, you're removing the next two words "financial diversification" from the statement. Your own personal opinions and emotions aside, financial diversification is not a bad idea. It's all about percentages and risk calculations. I would agree with you if they went "all in" on crypto, but they didn't say that.

Second, you're lumping in bad people with good tech that has solved a very specific problem - the ability to transfer funds without relying on a central bank or authority. Is email bad because the majority is spam? No. Is the internet bad because the dark web exists and thousands if not millions of crimes are being carried out on it? No. Are encrypted messengers bad because they allow criminals to send message? No. Same concept here. There can exist a good technology that gets abused by bad people.

“Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely.

You can stop at "money corrupts". bitcoin is money and money corrupts.

Disregarding all of bitcoin's shortcomings, a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won't change the world for the better.”

Disregarding all of the U.S. Dollar's shortcomings[1], a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won't change the world for the better.”

Fixed it for you.

[1] The US spent 877 BILLION dollars on its defense budget (as much as the next 10 countries combined!) to ensure the USD keeps its power.

[–] CynicusRex@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 months ago

“Responsible” and “Bitcoin” is an oxymoron due to the inherent multi-level marketing pyramid/Ponzi scheme aspect of crypto“currencies”.

First, you’re removing the next two words “financial diversification” from the statement. Your own personal opinions and emotions aside, financial diversification is not a bad idea. It’s all about percentages and risk calculations. I would agree with you if they went “all in” on crypto, but they didn’t say that.

Gambling or buying into a pyramid scheme doesn't belong to the category of financial diversification, let alone responsible financial diversification. Responsible financial diversification is investing in skills, property, purchasing cooperatives, official/institutional crowdfunding projects with sustainability in mind—not purely profit, ethical index funds, et cetera.

Second, you’re lumping in bad people with good tech that has solved a very specific problem - the ability to transfer funds without relying on a central bank or authority. Is email bad because the majority is spam? No. Is the internet bad because the dark web exists and thousands if not millions of crimes are being carried out on it? No. Are encrypted messengers bad because they allow criminals to send message? No. Same concept here. There can exist a good technology that gets abused by bad people.

All whataboutism fallacies. Crypto“currencies” incentivize greed. Not so for email, the Internet, messengers, et cetera. The only legitimate usecase for these alternative currencies is financing whistleblowers, journalists, individuals who have to break unethical laws and are therefore disconnected from the banking system.

“Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely.

You can stop at “money corrupts”. bitcoin is money and money corrupts.

Bitcoin more so because of its multi-level marketing / pyramid scheme aspect. When one buys USD or EUR one doesn't try convincing their peers to buy it too so their own wealth goes up.

Disregarding all of bitcoin’s shortcomings, a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won’t change the world for the better.”

Disregarding all of the U.S. Dollar’s shortcomings[1], a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won’t change the world for the better.”

Fixed it for you.

[1] The US spent 877 BILLION dollars on its defense budget (as much as the next 10 countries combined!) to ensure the USD keeps its power.

Whataboutism fallacy again.