Quote from: aesma on Today at 01:55:58 AM

Quote from: Torque on May 14, 2022, 06:54:53 PM

All this drama and garbage surrounding LUNA and TerraUST, meanwhile exactly zero people can explain to me the purpose, utility or usefulness of either one. Especially when other solutions already exist.

Waiting for Do Kwon himself to come in here and debate me on his garbage coins.

Because he would lose that debate soundly.

The emperor has no clothes, and his size is not size.

Personally I had never even heard of them until the crash. And I have looked at stablecoins recently to use in trading instead of fiat to simplify tax declarations. I chose USDC, seemed better than USDT. Both are backed by fiat on bank accounts (supposedly...).

An "algorithmic" stablecoin makes no sense, and one that is part of an "environment" with another coin that gives interest makes even less sense.

USDT = Tether

UST - Terracoin

Not sure if you were overlapping this matter? There is no issue with USDT even though it has been a common whipping boy for about the past 6-8 years... and frequently mainstream media and bitcoin naysayers want to proclaim that bitcoin's vulnerable to a crash in USDT and various ongoing FUD around USDT.

UST was a pretty recent invention in September 2020.. .. so the scam of UST whether purposeful or not only recently came into the shitcoin space - and surely interweaved itself with bitcoin, too.

Quote from: aesma on Today at 02:09:14 AM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on Today at 01:49:05 AM

Quote from: aesma on May 14, 2022, 05:07:24 PM

Casual retail investors can't get over the fact one BTC is so much money and doesn't return anything. When they see other coins are cheap and give 10% or 20% in "interest", and can rise in price like crazy.

Of course it always ends in tears...

Guys raise and argue those same points in this thread in terms of wanting to get yield on their bitcoin.. blah blah blah. when they seem to not appreciate that bitcoin is already designed to pump forever, in the sense that bitcoin already has a built in pumpening which is its soundness.

Yes the very limited money printing (mining).

From what I read Luna had limits on what could be printed in a time period, but when things started going wrong they immediately changed the limits, and some hours later they were printing billions of coins a minute, then dozens of billions, it was totally absurd.

Of course, bitcoin is not even in the same category, and many would argue, including yours truly that bitcoin does not have any money printing at all.

Sure, bitcoin's are issued (or made available) based on a preset algorithm, and the quantity was set from the start on January 3, 2009 when the first block was mined....

Seems to me that money printing has quite a different set of connotations, which do not apply to bitcoin - so it would not be good to use the same terminology in regards to what is happening in bitcoin.

I doubt that you and I are disagreeing about anything meaningful aesma - probably I am quibbling about some of the semantics or how I believe matters should be framed in order to distinguish bitcoin from shitcoins but also to suggest that there may well be no need to carry some of the same practices /expectations of earning yield over to bitcoin - even though sure, you can earn yield, but I really doubt that you will need to earn yield in bitcoin during the next 50 years or so... and perhaps longer.. to the extent that we might still be alive or needing to consider if anything has changed in bitcoin 50 years down the road in terms of its likely ongoing price appreciation and/or scarcity.