Bitcoin/cryptocurrency thread

[Satoshi]

12 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

I didn't make any comment on the market cap and I've said absolutely nothing about the likelihood of crypto value going up or down. You've completely misunderstood the point I was making.

 

But it's not a case of it being 100% correct or 100% incorrect. You're completely straw-manning what people are saying. You're pretending that people are claiming there is literally no difference between speculative investing and betting on the horses. In plenty jobs, people who are incapable of picking up nuances in what people are saying don't tend to get hired either.

 

That's one (very specific) definition. Another you can find very, very, easily is "take risky action in the hope of a desired result". That would clearly cover speculative investing.

If you don't understand that people here are generally referring to the second, broader definition, then I'm not sure what else there is to say.

Maybe you should reiterate the point you were making on cryptocurrency then, when you said the currency itself has no value and it didn't matter what people think. Or not, don't think it really matters tbh.

If you operate in the world of finance you don't say that investing in debt or assets is gambling. Because it isn't.

As it says it just moves the goalposts, do you think all investing is gambling? At what level of risk does it become gambling? 

For me, gambling is a game of chance, pursued for entertainment, and regulated by the gambling commission. If you start saying some investing is gambling then where you draw the line is totally arbitrary (or you don't draw it at all, and think that investing in US government bonds is gambling).

As I mentioned earlier, there is no completely safe thing to do with your money. Keeping it under the mattress or in the current account carries risk with it as well. 

[welshbairn]

9 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

For me, gambling is a game of chance, pursued for entertainment, and regulated by the gambling commission.

That's a subset of a subset of a subset.

[Gordon EF]

5 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Maybe you should reiterate the point you were making on cryptocurrency then, when you said the currency itself has no value and it didn't matter what people think. Or not, don't think it really matters tbh.

You mis-read what I said. I said a unit of cryptocurrency with a market value of £0 has absolutely no value. It has no monetary value and no use value. That make it different from some of the other assets that have been mentioned in this thread like houses and software technologies. They have use value.

 

Quote

If you operate in the world of finance you don't say that investing in debt or assets is gambling. Because it isn't.

As it says it just moves the goalposts, do you think all investing is gambling? At what level of risk does it become gambling? 

For me, gambling is a game of chance, pursued for entertainment, and regulated by the gambling commission. If you start saying some investing is gambling then where you draw the line is totally arbitrary (or you don't draw it at all, and think that investing in US government bonds is gambling).

As I mentioned earlier, there is no completely safe thing to do with your money. Keeping it under the mattress or in the current account carries risk with it as well. 

I get it. You like to have a very defined view of what gambling is and isn't so that there's a clear line and every activity can be put on one side or the other. That's not an objectively correct way to view the definition of gambling and others will take a broader view.

[vikingTON]

'Gambling = an activity regulated by the Gambling Commission' is up there in definitions with 'dog = not a cat'. 

[iron mike python]

Cryptocurrency Investing is gambling.

Are my crypto profits tax free? Like Gambling winnings?

[Sergeant Wilson]

53 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

I have no idea what your post is about.

It's  funny you should say that...

[Satoshi]

24 minutes ago, Gordon EF said:

You mis-read what I said. I said a unit of cryptocurrency with a market value of £0 has absolutely no value. It has no monetary value and no use value. That make it different from some of the other assets that have been mentioned in this thread like houses and software technologies. They have use value.

 

I get it. You like to have a very defined view of what gambling is and isn't so that there's a clear line and every activity can be put on one side or the other. That's not an objectively correct way to view the definition of gambling and others will take a broader view.

So where do you draw the line on what investing is gambling and what isn't?

And, not that it particularly matters, but there is plenty of worthless software out there with no (present) monetary or use value. 

[Gordon EF]

18 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

So where do you draw the line on what investing is gambling and what isn't?

And, not that it particularly matters, but there is plenty of worthless software out there with no (present) monetary or use value. 

I don't.

Obviously. The point is very clearly that it can. Crypto cannot.

[54_and_counting]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

That's a subset of a subset of a subset.

Oofftt

[KD1711]

Would definitely agree that majority of crypto is gambling, for example I stuck a few k into a coin called CumRockets with my mate last year, also did a few ETH into an NFT called Buzzed Bears, which was essentially pictures of bears snorting gear and acid, could I tell someone with a straight face that it is a serious investment? The coin+NFT has since did -99% from my buy in also. 

There are new coins popping up every single day and majority of them are with stupid names they are sheer punts, there was a poster here who was talking about praying to gods on crypto coins, and I would agree with him. I put 31 ETH into a coin which then rug pulled (the owners pulled all liquidity and did a runner essentially), ETH was around $700 per coin at the time but went upto $4500 after that, essentially costing me 6 figures.

When I was looking into the coin you are essentially just looking for someone to back up what you are thinking, which isn't hard to find when the influencers are being paid so much, and then bang you are in and hoping to god you get your 2/300%.

Majority of the coins that pop up they have their influencers who are either being paid a massive sum of money to promote the coin or a massive amount of coins, meaning they will just dump their holdings and take most of the liquidity upon release of the coin.

According to Coinstats there are 30,059 cryptocurrencies out there now, when I did my dissertation at Uni I did a part on crypto and this was in 2020 (pre covid) there were around a third of cryptos around then. 

When you really dig deep into it I would say less than 1% of these have actual real life use case. 

[hk blues]

16 hours ago, Satoshi said:

Ok so investing isn't gambling, but investing in cryptocurrency is?

It's a strange approach, but fair enough at least you are consistent.

It's still not a game of chance, played for entertainment, or regulated by the gambling commission. But if you want to think it's gambling go on yourself.

Are you saying you you cannot grasp the basic concept that there are different types of investments and thus can be viewed very differently? 

I have no control over what the regulators decide is to be regulated and not, nor over which definition of gambling you choose to identify with to support your view but I am using an alternative one (2.2) as follows - (Edit - just now read the previous few posts which have picked up on the same alternative definition)  - I don't see how you are recovering from this one now t.b.h. but let's see.

gam·ble

/ˈɡambəl/

verb

gerund or present participle: gambling

1. 1.

   play games of chance for money; bet.

   "she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"

    

    
2. 2.

   take risky action in the hope of a desired result.

   "the British could only gamble that something would turn up"

    

    

Edited July 27, 2022 by hk blues

[Satoshi]

14 hours ago, Gordon EF said:

I don't.

Obviously. The point is very clearly that it can. Crypto cannot.

Your views on crypto seem pretty odd. But that's fine.

11 minutes ago, hk blues said:

Are you saying you you cannot grasp the basic concept that there are different types of investments and thus can be viewed very differently? 

I have no control over what the regulators decide is to be regulated and not, nor over which definition of gambling you choose to identify with to support your view but I am using an alternative one (2.2) as follows -

gam·ble

/ˈɡambəl/

verb

gerund or present participle: gambling

1. 1.

   play games of chance for money; bet.

   "she was fond of gambling on cards and horses"

    

    
2. 2.

   take risky action in the hope of a desired result.

   "the British could only gamble that something would turn up"

What do you think the purpose of the gambling commission is?

But it's the same point as above, those who are happy to describe investments as gambling don't want to (or don't know where to) to draw the line. You have consistently avoided doing it (and it's obvious why, because you don't know and it would be totally arbitrary).

For me it's clear, investment and gambling are different activities regulated by completely different bodies. Some investors treat it as gambling (which I've said repeatedly) but this is a small minority. I don't think any gamblers think they are investing.

Gambling is a game of chance played for entertainment, investing is not.

Anyone who works in the investment industry and describes what they do as gambling won't be in a job for long.

If people want to call investing gambling (all or some and they are not sure where to draw the line) then fine, it's clear some minds won't change. The issue emerging from that is that people will be less likely to invest in anything. And long term that is likely to be bad for their overall wealth.

There is no safe thing you can do with your money, if you are a long term investor then low cost tracker ETFs have been reliably proven as the best asset class.

If someone is very risk adverse even investing in bonds is a better option than leaving it in a current account.

Schools should, but don't, teach kids about investing and risk. If you're a porn writer in his 60s then you're probably too set in your ways (who think some investing such as the ones I don't like or understand are just random gambling) but for young people it's important to know the difference.

I go back to my earlier example, if someone who doesn't have any financial knowledge comes into a lot of money telling them investing is gambling is not the correct approach. Investing in a low cost tracker ETF would usually be their best option depending on their risk profile, age and financial situation. 

 

[hk blues]

2 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Your views on crypto seem pretty odd. But that's fine.

What do you think the purpose of the gambling commission is?

But it's the same point as above, those who are happy to describe investments as gambling don't want to (or don't know where to) to draw the line. You have consistently avoided doing it (and it's obvious why, because you don't know and it would be totally arbitrary).

For me it's clear, investment and gambling are different activities regulated by completely different bodies. Some investors treat it as gambling (which I've said repeatedly) but this is a small minority. I don't think any gamblers think they are investing.

Gambling is a game of chance played for entertainment, investing is not.

Anyone who works in the investment industry and describes what they do as gambling won't be in a job for long.

If people want to call investing gambling (all or some and they are not sure where to draw the line) then fine, it's clear some minds won't change. The issue emerging from that is that people will be less likely to invest in anything. And long term that is likely to be bad for their overall wealth.

There is no safe thing you can do with your money, if you are a long term investor then low cost tracker ETFs have been reliably proven as the best asset class.

If someone is very risk adverse even investing in bonds is a better option than leaving it in a current account.

Schools should, but don't, teach kids about investing and risk. If you're a porn writer in his 60s then you're probably too set in your ways (who think some investing such as the ones I don't like or understand are just random gambling) but for young people it's important to know the difference.

I go back to my earlier example, if someone who doesn't have any financial knowledge comes into a lot of money telling them investing is gambling is not the correct approach. Investing in a low cost tracker ETF would usually be their best option depending on their risk profile, age and financial situation. 

 

You continue to refuse to acknowledge that different types of investing can be classified differently. 

You have also failed to acknowledge that gambling doesn't mean what you think it does.

Simply put, you are totally reliant on your own interpretation of gambling and refuse to see that it isn't necessarily the only one.

[Satoshi]

18 minutes ago, hk blues said:

You continue to refuse to acknowledge that different types of investing can be classified differently. 

You have also failed to acknowledge that gambling doesn't mean what you think it does.

Simply put, you are totally reliant on your own interpretation of gambling and refuse to see that it isn't necessarily the only one.

Different types of investing are clearly classified differently - that's the whole reason credit agencies exist. And I have repeatedly said crypto is a risky speculative asset.

It doesn't mean the definition I've posted? The reason this came up in the first place was that I said I don't gamble it's not my thing at all (playing games of chance for entertainment) only for 53_and_counting and Oaksoft to insist investing in crypto is gambling. It isn't. I certainly don't treat it as playing a game of chance for entertainment purposes. Do other people? Probably, but I certainly don't and I don't view my activities as gambling (hence my initial post).

If people define gambling as investing then yeah I'm a problem gambler with over 90% of my wealth invested or 'gambled'. I've made a lot of money 'gambling' and lost a lot. Like anyone with a pension fund I'm a gambler. And because I work in the industry I'm a professional gambler too (like tens of thousands of people in the finance and asset management industry). If they view any risky activity as gambling then I definitely gamble in my personal life with scuba diving and sky diving (rather than these being activities with significant risk mitigations in place). I've taught diving before, I don't tell new divers that "we're taking a big gamble today!". They would be mortified, and I would probably be fired from a job I don't even get paid for.

It all sounds a bit ridiculous to me.

Do you at least agree it's beneficial for people to understand the concepts of investing and risk?

Do you agree considering only the investments you don't like or don't understand as gambling is a bit arbitrary?

Do you agree (or at least think it's likely) the entire asset management industry don't self perceive themselves as gamblers?

 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Satoshi

[hk blues]

8 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

Different types of investing are clearly classified differently - that's the whole reason credit agencies exist. And I have repeatedly said crypto is a risky speculative asset.

It doesn't mean the definition I've posted? The reason this came up in the first place was that I said I don't gamble it's not my thing at all (playing games of chance for entertainment) only for 53_and_counting and Oaksoft to insist investing in crypto is gambling. It isn't. I certainly don't treat it as playing a game of chance for entertainment purposes.

If people define gambling as investing then yeah I'm a problem gambler with over 90% of my wealth invested or 'gambled'. I've made a lot of money 'gambling' and lost a lot. Like anyone with a pension fund I'm a gambler. And because I work in the industry I'm a professional gambler too (like tens of thousands of people in the finance and asset management industry). If they view any risky activity as gambling then I definitely gamble in my personal life with scuba diving and ski diving (rather than these being activities with significant risk mitigations in place).

All sounds a bit ridiculous to me.

Do you at least agree it's beneficial for people to understand the concepts of investing and risk?

Do you agree considering only the investments you don't like or don't understand as gambling is a bit arbitrary?

Do you agree (or at least think it's likely) the entire asset management industry don't self perceive themselves as gamblers?

 

Let's keep it simple -

I think investing in crypto is gambling, you don't.  Nothing You, me or anyone else can say will change that.  

When someone point blank refuses to accept a dictionary definition of a word then it's time to call it quits.

Edited July 27, 2022 by hk blues

[Satoshi]

31 minutes ago, hk blues said:

Let's keep it simple -

I think investing in crypto is gambling, you don't.  Nothing You, me or anyone else can say will change that.  

When someone point blank refuses to accept a dictionary definition of a word then it's time to call it quits.

I don't refuse to accept it, the number one definition of gambling on Google is to play games of chance for money. I've made it very clear why I don't describe investing as gambling (and why nobody in a massive industry does). I've also made it clear that anything you do with money carries some risk.

And fine, you think investments you don't like (or understand) is gambling but not other forms of investment. I won't bother trying to convince you otherwise.

And even if you didn't any any of my questions I hope they are least gave you some food for thought.

[hk blues]

6 minutes ago, Satoshi said:

I don't refuse to accept it, the number one definition of gambling on Google is to play games of chance for money. I've made it very clear why I don't describe investing as gambling (and why nobody in a massive industry does). I've also made it clear that anything you do with money carries some risk.

And fine, you think investments you don't like (or understand) is gambling but not other forms of investment. I won't bother trying to convince you otherwise.

And even if you didn't any any of my questions I hope they are least gave you some food for thought.

 

 

[KD1711]

13 hours ago, oaksoft said:

...

This thread is hilarious.

I am pissing myself looking back on it, convinced that I would be done at work because CumRockets was going to go to the moon and pictures of cartoon bears snorting acid would make me a multi millionaire... the feeling was similar to me sticking on my 8 team hail mary convinced I was going to strike it big.

[vikingTON]

Why does nobody in the massive and enormously well-numerated 'financial services' industry refer to their speculative activities as gambling? It's a toughie. 

Surely we could only expect integrity from the selfless community of interests that brought you 'sub-prime' mortgage and fraudulent derivative markets to great effect in the past 20 years alone!

[SuperSaints1877]

3 hours ago, Satoshi said:

If people define gambling as investing then yeah I'm a problem gambler with over 90% of my wealth invested or 'gambled'. I've made a lot of money 'gambling' and lost a lot. Like anyone with a pension fund I'm a gambler. And because I work in the industry I'm a professional gambler too (like tens of thousands of people in the finance and asset management industry).

 

Now that you’ve finally admitted your problems I think it’s about time you changed your username to Kenny Rogers.