How do you see Luna's market value from $10 billion to 0 within 3 days?

[timta2]

If the founder is living in an apartment, you know things weren't going well.

Crypto Investor Who Lost Big Money Spooks Luna Founder's Wife at Home: Report

Luna, once the fourth largest cryptocurrency in the world, plunged to $0 on Thursday.

gizmodo.com

 

[qubit]

If the founder is living in an apartment, you know things weren't going well.

Crypto Investor Who Lost Big Money Spooks Luna Founder's Wife at Home: Report

Luna, once the fourth largest cryptocurrency in the world, plunged to $0 on Thursday.

gizmodo.com

But it could be a million dollar apartment? Nah, I'm with ya.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I never invested in Luna, so not too concerned, the dip , I've seen it before, and what came after.

 

[Fourstaff]

The way I see it, all money will ultimately fail since the essence of money is an agreed-upon proxy of value. How long the money last is ultimately dependent on trust, and trust is usually backed up by lots of resources. In the case of stablecoins like Luna, this trust is managed in two steps: trust in the money pegged (in this case USD), and trust that the mechanism will be able to maintain the peg. From here on, anyone aiming to make a lot of money (like George Soros) can simply stress the pegging mechanism to the point of failure. I am surprised Luna's dev team didn's see this coming: its texbook 1997 Asian Financial Crash material.

 

[Dr. Dro]

The foremost problem is acknowledging crypto as money. The one that follows it is that it's a ponzi, and I could keep going.

I rejoice upon seeing crypto bros squirm.

 

[simlife]

In April, Luna’s price rose to a peak of $116 from less than $1 in early 2021, minting a generation of crypto millionaires. A community of retail traders formed around the coin, hailing Mr. Kwon as a cult hero. Mike Novogratz, chief executive of Galaxy Digital, which invested in Terraform Labs, announced his support by getting a Luna-themed tattoo.
But last week, Luna and another currency that Mr. Kwon developed, TerraUSD, suffered a spectacular collapse. Their meltdowns had a domino effect on the rest of the cryptocurrency market, tanking the price of Bitcoin and accelerating the loss of $300 billion in value across the crypto economy. This week, the price of Luna remained close to zero, while TerraUSD continued to slide.

How do you see Luna's market value from $10 billion to 0 within 3 days?

10 billion seems like alot but its really tiny in persective of a planet the US was trying to send 54 billion in aid to Ukraine..

its also a MASSIVE note these extra cryptos were created 98% because ppl were making money off other cryptos even though its young ppl and just ppl who are investing and not really spending it.... and a currency its ment to be spent... its basicly a scam ... if your wealth can jump 20+ -% in days... no one said well 7. 50 minum wage is ok in 2016 then it jumps to 14 the next day to 12 the next.... would riot.... the money value is too fluid to matter... and when 75+% is wealthy/investors/ ppl hoping to get rich are the ones who own the currency.

 

[watzupken]

In April, Luna’s price rose to a peak of $116 from less than $1 in early 2021, minting a generation of crypto millionaires. A community of retail traders formed around the coin, hailing Mr. Kwon as a cult hero. Mike Novogratz, chief executive of Galaxy Digital, which invested in Terraform Labs, announced his support by getting a Luna-themed tattoo.
But last week, Luna and another currency that Mr. Kwon developed, TerraUSD, suffered a spectacular collapse. Their meltdowns had a domino effect on the rest of the cryptocurrency market, tanking the price of Bitcoin and accelerating the loss of $300 billion in value across the crypto economy. This week, the price of Luna remained close to zero, while TerraUSD continued to slide.

How do you see Luna's market value from $10 billion to 0 within 3 days?

To me, this is a tragic that people always fail to recognise the risk. Anything that promises good returns generally also comes with high risk, which is clearly shown in this example. You want to create “money” out of thin air by means of a new cryptocurrency, this is generally what you get. It is like trying to climb a hill with no steps because there is basically just some paper fundamentals to the currency. In other words, you are hoping that hot air will rise you from the ground to the top of the hill with no steps. The creator of the currency have probably cashed out on their “investment” and this being a zero sum game means those that went in big or late are paying them with the promise of hot air that will make them rich.

 

[R-T-B]

The one that follows it is that it's a ponzi

No, it's really not that simple.

its also a MASSIVE note these extra cryptos were created 98% because ppl were making money off other cryptos even though its young ppl and just ppl who are investing and not really spending it.... and a currency its ment to be spent... its basicly a scam ...

Crypto hasn't really functioned as a currency in almost a decade. However that does not automatically make it a scam. It makes it more a marketplace or stock market of ideas. The problem is a lot of the ideas are lackluster or solve nothing.

 

[Fourstaff]

Crypto hasn't really functioned as a currency in almost a decade. However that does not automatically make it a scam. It makes it more a marketplace or stock market of ideas. The problem is a lot of the ideas are lackluster or solve nothing.

Unfortunately there is a big crowd of people who believe crypto as the next currency, indeed the main draw of stablecoins are currency replacements. Once this idea wears off then there will be a massive exodus which will deflate the price. I view crypto/blockchain as a solution looking for a problem to solve.

 

[R-T-B]

I view crypto/blockchain as a solution looking for a problem to solve.

I view that as an unfortunately naive view, given the essential place crypto was birthed was in forums for cash alternatives of people fed up with paypal and traditional banking.

I'd argue if there weren't an issue there crypto would never have come about because those forums would not even have existed. Unfortunately, crypto has become completely unusable for the very problem it was aiming to solve. I'm not sure it can overcome the hurdle of transaction volume, sadly. I view it as a dead attempt to answer a legitimate issue that has utterly failed, and morphed into something far more destructive.

Blockchain may have some uses yet. I really am not so hopeful for crypto"currency."

 

[mb194dc]

The way I see it, all current crypto "currencies" are nothing more than elaborate technologically obfuscated pyramid schemes.

They don't produce any return, you can't really use them for anything. If you get in first, others come in behind you and push the value up, you can sell for more. That's their own purpose.

Due to needing fresh money in at the base to rise in value continually, they'll all be liable to total collapse, once the value goes the wrong way. Why hold something that is useless and doesn't produce an income?

Blockchain technology itself might have a real world use, eventually.

 

[R-T-B]

The way I see it, all current crypto "currencies" are nothing more than elaborate technologically obfuscated pyramid schemes.

I'd agree if that was the intent from the getgo, but it wasn't. A lot of earliest pioneers coins (Satoshi comes to mind) have ironically, never been spent. Hence, the pyramid is held up by them and their hoards of unspent coins, ie they don't benefit from it. That's not a traditional pyramid scheme.

They don't produce any return, you can't really use them for anything.

This wasn't always true, but sadly, it pretty much is now.

 

[SpittinFax]

I'm mostly just disappointed. Disappointed that crypto has ever been considered as a legitimate currency. Disappointed that anyone would pour their savings into such an unstable get-rich-quick scheme. Disappointed that it's ruined the technology market and wasted unfathomable amounts of energy. Disappointed that money laundering, scams and the black market are the primary uses for crypto. Disappointed that crypto has failed to become what it promised to be in the very beginning: A global conversion-less digital currency that supersedes traditional currency in brick and mortar payments. It was touted as the currency of the future and, well, proves that the future is even more shit than the past.

 

[R-T-B]

Disappointed that crypto has ever been considered as a legitimate currency.

It's not thinking of it as a currency that has gotten us here... those days were mostly harmless and good.

It's the modern view of it as a "magic money farm" that has created nearly all the negatives. Including the massive rise in value that has led to all the issues.

Disappointed that money laundering, scams and the black market are the primary uses for crypto.

They really aren't. It's basically become a giant investors casino, not a criminal freeforall. Crime on it exists, but is not a major percentage vs all the "get rich quick" investors.

I'll agree with the general sentiment though: it is very sad.

 

[Vayra86]

I view that as an unfortunately naive view, given the essential place crypto was birthed was in forums for cash alternatives of people fed up with paypal and traditional banking.

I'd argue if there weren't an issue there crypto would never have come about because those forums would not even have existed. Unfortunately, crypto has become completely unusable for the very problem it was aiming to solve. I'm not sure it can overcome the hurdle of transaction volume, sadly. I view it as a dead attempt to answer a legitimate issue that has utterly failed, and morphed into something far more destructive.

Blockchain may have some uses yet. I really am not so hopeful for crypto"currency."

Wow! About time

I think the reasons people are fed up with paypal and traditional banking are the perfect indicators that crypto was never going to work. Those people wanted their cake and eat it too. Total freedom and total security plus lowest cost and total privacy. Good luck. It comes down to the simple saying 'if it looks to good to be true, it probably is'.

The idea of it 'being possible' fits in a longer term internet narrative where the rules 'will be rewritten' by the great power of the shared collective. Mhm. Just like how Big Data is solving all our questions... except its really not. Every time we see that what is 'dominant' in collective thinking, should in fact be avoided or we become idiots with tunnel vision digging deep holes, social media is a fantastic experiment like that. These are paradoxes, as much as crypto is a paradox in itself in every possible way - the scaling of transactions versus no footprint is one; the decentralized nature versus security/regulation is another.

 

[R-T-B]

Wow! About time

I've had a view similar to the above for a good few months.

It was admittedly overdue. I still like to view things through a factual lens though, and with all the misinformation around crypto, many confuse my tone as being "pro-crypto."

If anything of that remains, it's a fascination with blockchain. The "currency" hype in me died a while ago.

Those people wanted their cake and eat it too. Total freedom and total security plus lowest cost and total privacy

Yeah, it does sound rather Utopian when you lay it out like that, right?

Still, I'd dread a mankind that dared not dream.

 

[Vayra86]

Still, I'd dread a mankind that dared not dream.

So do I, the problem is too many people dream of getting rich (or powerful) before dreaming of the things that really matter.

 

[Dr. Dro]

No, it's really not that simple.

Good read on the subject by a computer scientist from a local university:

Bitcoin is a Ponzi

ic.unicamp.br

Seems concise and covers up every aspect as to why it is a ponzi, there's also Antsstyle's excellent article which covers every aspect of why cryptocurrencies aren't what their creators claim they are:

Why NFTs are bad: the long version

This is the in-depth follow up to this brief article:

antsstyle.medium.com

These two articles cover my stance on crypto and all related "technologies" in far more detail than I ever could spare the time for.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Good read on the subject by a computer scientist from a local university:

Bitcoin is a Ponzi

ic.unicamp.br

Seems concise and covers up every aspect as to why it is a ponzi, there's also Antsstyle's excellent article which covers every aspect of why cryptocurrencies aren't what their creators claim they are:

Why NFTs are bad: the long version

This is the in-depth follow up to this brief article:

antsstyle.medium.com

These two articles cover my stance on crypto and all related "technologies" in far more detail than I ever could spare the time for.

Opinions eh(this is the sanitised ver 2.0), everyone has one.

Does that mean everyone's opinion is right, you call NFT's crypto and go on to imply the shit show that is NFT's summarised crypto in general, I disagree and would add I won't be debating my opinion with you since it's clear to me your stance and understanding of it from that one post.

I don't do Luna, I don't do all crypto, I agree Some are little better than a scam but don't agree all are to concisely present my opinion.

 

[Assimilator]

I view that as an unfortunately naive view, given the essential place crypto was birthed was in forums for cash alternatives of people fed up with paypal and traditional banking.

I've yet to read a cohesive explanation about what exactly made PayPal and/or traditional banking so problematic that an alternative, far less efficient monetary system was needed.

Yeah, it does sound rather Utopian when you lay it out like that, right?

Be careful of conflating utopia with anarchy.

imply the shit show that is NFT's summarised crypto in general

Explain to me how https://web3isgoinggreat.com/?tech=currency isn't a shitshow.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I've yet to read a cohesive explanation about what exactly made PayPal and/or traditional banking so problematic that an alternative, far less efficient monetary system was needed.


Be careful of conflating utopia with anarchy.


Explain to me how https://web3isgoinggreat.com/?tech=currency isn't a shitshow.

Explain to me why I should.

I said"

I don't do Luna, I don't do all crypto, I agree Some are little better than a scam but don't agree all are to concisely present my opinion."

So wtaf web3.0 has to do with the OP , my statement or even crypto is both beyond me and erroneous.

So after a read of that site your argument stands on the fact that useless coins are made by nefarious idiots to rob the foolish, and crimes happen in the domain of alt coin's.

Genius,
now to drag a Tpu relevant point just how many Fools do we see on here buying a fake GPU.
How many people are involved in financial crimes.
How many people are duped into Investments that go poof.

Hmnn it's crypto on mass in general, no it's tw@t$ and T@£d$. .

And they'll always exist.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Opinions eh(this is the sanitised ver 2.0), everyone has one.

Does that mean everyone's opinion is right, you call NFT's crypto and go on to imply the shit show that is NFT's summarised crypto in general, I disagree and would add I won't be debating my opinion with you since it's clear to me your stance and understanding of it from that one post.

I don't do Luna, I don't do all crypto, I agree Some are little better than a scam but don't agree all are to concisely present my opinion.

Not really, I just know when something will become a protracted, and possibly heated argument, so I tend to stay away from that

However, the articles I brought up are rather concise and would take an extensive amount of time to read, parse, understand and an even longer time to counter, so whenever you do have the time, read that even if you feel like you don't agree with what's written in it. To this day I've never seen anyone actually successfully argue against Antsstyle's article in good faith, and I only came across Jorge Stolfi's post relatively recently.

I'm always open to ideas, but I can see a scheme when I come across one.

 

[MentalAcetylide]

Unfortunately there is a big crowd of people who believe crypto as the next currency, indeed the main draw of stablecoins are currency replacements. Once this idea wears off then there will be a massive exodus which will deflate the price. I view crypto/blockchain as a solution looking for a problem to solve.

Hard to say, but one way or another, a cashless currency is eventually going to replace all physical currency. Any cryptocurrency that can be tracked could potentially solve a lot of problems with criminal activity involving transactions, but that's about it. The issue I have with it is that the system is entirely dependent on computers(we're almost there now), which in itself is vulnerable to threats from abroad, so if the one and only form of making financial transactions is somehow crippled, we're screwed.

As for whether or not crypto is a ponzi scheme, some are and some aren't. The fact remains that its a very high risk investment to get into regardless of whether or not a particular crypto coin is a ponzi scheme. If you're going to play, only invest with what you don't care about losing. I avoid it like the plague because I don't care for managing high risk investments that can be burned due to one or more popular figures tweeting with their asses.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Most companies offer dividends and distribute their real profits back to their shareholders. The ones that don't offer dividends are at least making a profit and are investing into CapEx (new factories and what-not, which likely will make more profits next year).

No as many as you think, there are quite a few sure, but it also depends on which exchange. Some exchanges are 'luckier' than others ( of companies that do offer dividends). When it comes to distributing profits, there are a few companies that offer profit sharing, in lieu of dividends.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

Not really, I just know when something will become a protracted, and possibly heated argument, so I tend to stay away from that

However, the articles I brought up are rather concise and would take an extensive amount of time to read, parse, understand and an even longer time to counter, so whenever you do have the time, read that even if you feel like you don't agree with what's written in it. To this day I've never seen anyone actually successfully argue against Antsstyle's article in good faith, and I only came across Jorge Stolfi's post relatively recently.

I'm always open to ideas, but I can see a scheme when I come across one.

As I said I will leave you to it, it's not my place to convince or convert you plus I couldn't care less what you think, or why.

None the less I think your wrong mostly because you are racist against crypto, they're all the same right.

I don't headbutt walls either.