• limerod@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Do you know anything about financial markets?

    I’m at a beginner level in Investments and stock market.

    Study and you’ll understand everything you could do with it.

    I’m already learning about Investments and stock market. Maybe, once I finish that I could consider this. But, I don’t see much value in crypto so won’t bother.

    Perhaps, if my perception changes in the future I could reconsider. Just not in the near future.

    • freedomsailor@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      But crypto is just like the stocks: you can buy it because you believe on the project or just because it’s what’s delivering the best results at the moment. Consider cryptocurrencies as a little portion of your portfolio, intended for risk. You can operate it via ETFs, and thus don’t expose yourself to the risks (and benefits) of the blockchains.

      • BakerBagel@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        3 months ago

        A stock is based on the profits and production of real companies that offer real goods and services. Crypto is based entirely on hype and sunk cost fallacies.

        • locuester@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          This is simply not true. I’ve been a fulltime software dev in the crypto space for 3 years. Moved to crypto after 25 years in the financial sector. My work in the crypto space is a near parallel to the legacy financial sector wrt products and services I’m delivering.

          Sure crypto has a scammer and hype and meme angle but I operate in none of those.

          Think of NASDAQ without all the rules. Where anyone can list and trade anything, even complex financial derivatives. It’s so freeing for the little guy. It levels the playing field of the financial system and access to capital quite a bit.

          • Sonori@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            3 months ago

            You realize that the things listed on the NASDAQ actually represent more than just an entery in a database, right? Like the groups listed on there tend to make physical objects and software that does things beyond move things that can be traded for currency around?

            You also realize that the NASDAQ, without all the protections and basic rules the public forced it to adopt after vast numbers of little guys got screwed out of all their money, isn’t actually that great of a pitch? At least not to anyone but the far right uber rich libertarians that hold majority control of the crypto space.

            We are talking about a technology that is about as old as smartphones, but which has still yet to see any widespread use to solve a problem it did not itself create.

            • locuester@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              I spent 25 years in tradfi as mentioned previously. I’m not delusional or a grifter/scammer.

              You realize that some of the things listed on crypto markets actually represent more than just an entry in a distributed ledger, right? I live in Solana (a distributed ledger) world and there’s dozens of tokens which represent true products. Sure most are financial related themselves - but that’s no different than tradfi where banks and exchanges are themselves listed on the exchanges. Others are depin models and governance things for example. It’s a real industry which gets a bad rap since it does enable bad people to do bad things too, and that gets most the press.

              First off, our securities regulation is ancient and much is based on a pre internet global world. There’s many changes that can be made to give consumers access to private equity and capital efficiency which currently the rich have guarded for themselves.

              Secondly, there are far bigger and badder scams under the current regulation. Enron, worldcom, madoff, tyco, healthsouth, centennial, bre-x etc.

              Bad people do bad things under either model, but the free, permissionless model sure opens the door to allow little guys to have a chance.

              Raising capital for a small venture in a free global market is a tough nut to crack. And yeah thar be dragons there. But it’s such a freeing concept once you see it in action. I believe in freedom of money, and the global revolution it can bring.

              • Sonori@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                3 months ago

                Um, no. Traditional markets have financial related companies, but you’ll have to show me where you’re getting the idea the finance sector makes up the majority of the traditional market and as such it is no different than the crypto space where finance makes up nearly the entire market.

                I also don’t think that the existence of the internet really changed much when it comes to the need for rules for soliciting investment from the public such as providing investors accounting figures and legal accountability. Nor has it changed the fact that cryptocurrencies haven’t changed the process for gaining the investment necessary to start a new bakery or other small business and never will provide a pathway to do so, and as such hasn’t really changed much at all when it comes to providing customers with more access to investment loans outside of more crypto businesses.

                A lot of the scandals you listed weren’t done under the current market regulation, but rather directly led to the current market regulation at the behest of the little guys who got screwed over and pressured politicians into passing it, and as such I just don’t see how removing the protections for the little guy is ment to benefit them over the rich.

                I mean surely then the rich would be opposed to the crypto and loosening regulations rather than being the ones most heavily pushing and lobbying the government for them?

                • locuester@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I never said a majority of stocks are financial. I’m crypto they are tho but that’s kinda obvious given that we are bootstrapping a new financial system.

                  The internet changed a ton of things!!! Individual investors have so many tools to research now compared to 30 years ago! It’s much easier to get due diligence on investments and confer with others.

                  Accounting figures are obviously FAR superior with crypto native companies since everything is verifiable.

                  cryptocurrencies haven’t changed the process for gaining the investment necessary to start a new bakery or other small business and never will provide a pathway to do so

                  I adamantly disagree with that last part. This is precisely where crypto shines when done right it allows everyone an equal footing on raising and investing in capital projects. Note I’m not saying that it removes risk - it removes friction - admittedly at the cost of risk.

                  The reason you don’t see this taking off is 100% because of regulations, hoops, lawyers, and capital required to register a security. If I want to tokenize a business plan in the USA, I cannot easily do that without getting wrecked by the SEC.

                  The elitists can and will continue to do private equity and insider trading to maintain a lead because they have the capital to do so. I can’t speak to how they all feel about crypto. I would assume they would love it too. Free markets are far cheaper than the crap they go through now to do fund raising and such.

                  It’ll be interesting to see how this goes in the coming 30 years. It definitely benefits countries without a strong financial system already in place way more. Will it outperform the legacy, cumbersome financial system? Time will tell!

                  • Sonori@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I don’t think it’s obvious that a tool for loaning money to businesses would be primarily used for loaning money to businesses trying to solve problems with the tool itself.

                    I don’t think the internet has really changed all that much when it comes to due diligence. Maybe it’s a little easier to do background checks or find a person’s previous projects, but you still need an trusted third party to audit a company, you still need to be sure who is legally liable for if things go wrong, etc…

                    Neglecting that a lot of companies don’t actually want every person’s pay, every dime they spend for a luncheon, and every thing R&D buys to be publicly available to their competitors, it’s still not actually much help for verifying and auditing their financials because nearly all fraud already relies on people entering false information to the computer about what the transaction was for or why it was made, not anything that could be verified by the chain.

        • jarfil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          No it’s not.

          Stocks are based on the “valuation” people give them, for whatever reason they want. Check Gazprom’s recent stock valuation for a reality check; it doesn’t matter what “real goods or services” it keeps providing, everyone who held Gazprom stock, got exactly $0 for it. For further information, check how much company shares are worth.

          (Spoiler: they’re ALL based on “hype and sunken cost”)

      • azthec@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 months ago

        Cryptocurrencies are not like stocks, stock is partial ownership of an enterprise which has the ultimate goal of generating more revenue, stocks are not a trading currency.

      • Sonori@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        Most people when starting out are, or at least should be, very uneasy about putting money into things with no underlying value or feasible purpose beyond being bought by a greater fool in the future.

          • Sonori@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            I’ve rarely heard it suggested as an investment, but it can actually be realisticly used to goods and services outside of itself and as such does have an actual purpose, which is more than can be said for any crypto currency.

            • LobYonder@monero.town
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              There are several cryptocurrencies which are regularly used for purchases. Just because BTC and meme-coins get the media coverage and speculation doesn’t stop others being used for transactions.

            • jarfil@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Cash is inflationary, “by definition” as per current monetary theories, meaning it is designed to lose value over time. Not much of an investment.

              Also, I can’t use USD, GBP or AUD for “goods and services outside of itself”… unless I exchange them for EUR first, same as any Crypto.

              • Sonori@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                That every currency is not accepted everywhere in the world, though every one you listed is pretty commonly accepted by business and as such you absolutely could by things with them in the Eurozone, is not an argument that they are the same as an casino token.

                • jarfil@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  They’re not legal tender, not at all commonly accepted, and anyone accepting them (mostly in tourist areas) will charge an exchange fee because nobody’s going to take them as payment for their bills.

                  They’re all the same as casino tokens though, because they don’t have an intrinsic value, like for example an ounce of gold.

                  • Fiat represents the trust an issuing bank has in everyone trusting it at a faster pace than the expiry of its loans.
                  • Casino tokens represent the trust a person has in the casino paying out when getting the token back.
                  • Crypto represents the trust in that someone will want to exchange it for something in the future.

                  Since the end of the gold standard, economy has been running on trust (aka: credit). These are just different representations of that.