The problem is, if these exchanges collapse, the value of that crypto you have will drop significantly. So yes, you still have your crypto assets, but there is a real chance they could end up being worthless.
Even if you don't use exchanges, you are still exposed to their failure because they are major players in the market that determines the value of the cryptocurrencies. When major players in a market go bust, it's unlikely that any of the other market participants will end up unscathed.
Given that crypto value is based solely on what other people are willing to pay for it, it really could go to zero. It probably won't go all the way to zero, but I'd still expect a significant drop.
This indicates that the value was propped up by market manipulation. I have no problem with a crash like this, as I have no exposure to centralized * exchanges.
I also don't have illusions about price action. I don't invest into crypto to make a quick buck. I invest because I fundamentally oppose traditional finance.
The entire crypto market is nothing but[1] market manipulation and speculation. If that goes away your crypto will be virtually worthless.
[1] pre-empting the "but it's used for practical things in countries with crumbling economies instead of the local currency" argument: yes, but that's such a tiny portion of total market cap that it probably doesn't affect the value of your holdings by any meaningful amount.
> [1] pre-empting the "but it's used for practical things in countries with crumbling economies instead of the local currency" argument: yes, but that's such a tiny portion of total market cap that it probably doesn't affect the value of your holdings by any meaningful amount.
Also good ol' fiat dollars are better than crypto for that use case in pretty much every way.
Really, no exposure to centralized finance? You only use crypto to pay your rent and buy your groceries and your clothing? Your employer pays you in crypto?
I think the mania is still there, based on some of the reactions I see defending crypto. But a lot of people must have bailed out to make the Bitcoin price drop so much.
I'll believe the mania is over when Bitcoin reverts to pre-2017 prices and stays that way forever. Honestly I've been considering buying some because I suspect the dip will be temporary, but ultimately I'm not that foolish with my money.
crypto *is* traditional finance. whenever humans transact with each other, we reify the behavioral mechanisms which define us as a species. we cannot help but create economies, to trade and transact. all finance is "traditional" finance until our biology changes and new emergent dynamics and equilibriums establish themselves. however thermodynamics, statistics and other math might also have a lot to say on the matter.
there is no such thing as traditional finance, just finance.
When people talk about traditional finance, we mostly refer to the existing technologies for issuance of currency, settlement of fiat transactions, and the debt hierarchy.
Of course finance is an incredibly nuanced word. To quote V. Buterin:
> Finance can be viewed as a set of patterns that naturally emerge in many kinds of systems that do not attempt to prevent collusion
The only point at which you should quote Buterin is if asked to quote someone with absolutely no knowledg trying to speak from a position of authority. Him making up a new definition for a widely used word to justify the existence of his shitcoin does not make it gospel.
you are displaying a lot of foolish ignorance and compounding it with misplaced certitude but in good faith and a spirit of wide eyed curiosity I applaud your lack of understanding of finance. also you get a lot of credit for using the word "nuance" as if it somehow changes the definition of the word finance.
finance, trading, barter, humans will not allow collusion to continue unchecked. so finance being defined partly as the lack of check against collision is pure propaganda by Buterin and you are his mark. the only reason the collusion rife in the crypto space is so unchecked is because its a big casino constructed for you to play in by people like SBF, CZ, V. Buterin. The whales represent a huge cartel. The drama of the last few days is a parable of collusion, retail being tricked into gambling their life savings, retail being fed lies about how the word is and how the world is not, lies which are easy to disprove.
you are a classic retail mark, being fed and regurgitating marketing and propaganda to encourage you to play your part.
look up retail FX trading manias in Japan in the early to mid 00's as recent past as prologue.
> you are displaying a lot of foolish ignorance and compounding it with misplaced certitude but in good faith and a spirit of wide eyed curiosity I applaud your lack of understanding of finance.
Why is this kind of defensive retort so commonly seen in discussions about the value of cryptocurrency?
this is no ad hominem - I am attacking your statements here not you as a person. you are flaunting your ignorance and using some weird appeal to authority by posting a vague quote from V. B. which itself is like, not even wrong.
I am not defensive, I am embarrassed for you and all of the people poisoned by this antisocial propaganda, and it makes me despair for humanity.
I wasn't making an appeal to authority, nor was I agreeing with V.B. I was trying to point out that finance may mean different things in different contexts. Not sure why you keep obsessing over this propaganda narrative, as if I'm a brainless NPC. I'm open to learning new things, and if you're more knowledgable then I'll listen.
For instance, I really like your view of finance as these emergent properties of human behaviour. My question is then: how do you propose we refer to the entities we currently have in place for trading of securities, market making, fractional banking, clearing houses, central bank issued fiat, etc? Clearly there is a difference between those "things" and what we do in DeFi, right?
So what label am I allowed to use to distinguish these entities from DeFi?
On HN this particular flavor seems to only accompany crypto. Other polarizing topics e.g. criticism of Apple or Facebook, or even China, don’t exhibit this weird style.
First of all, the "collusion" Buterin is referring to is a game -theoretic term and is precisely defined. Based on your response I'm guessing you are not familiar with his blog post.
Calling something propaganda without being familiar with the source is probably the purest form of irony.
Exchanges should not collapse if all they do is collect commissions from people trading. They collapse when they issue their own tokens and borrow hard assets against those very soft tokens.
Nobody in the crypto industry has the self-control to just be an exchange.
The whole idea of crypto attracts the same people as other get-rich-quick schemes. Some scammers, some earnest people. But all ultimately lacking in self control.
if these exchanges collapse, the value of that crypto you have will drop significantly
The throne is never empty, right? We are probably still to find out if it’s worth sitting on long term, but since that genie left the bottle, I suspect it is.
Even if you don't use exchanges, you are still exposed to their failure because they are major players in the market that determines the value of the cryptocurrencies. When major players in a market go bust, it's unlikely that any of the other market participants will end up unscathed.
Given that crypto value is based solely on what other people are willing to pay for it, it really could go to zero. It probably won't go all the way to zero, but I'd still expect a significant drop.