It looks like the implication here is that spending large amounts of money on altcoins, and then earnng to give if you get lucky, is one of the best things an EA can do.
This is not true; becoming a crypto billionaire is a losing strategy. Every time crypto billionaires are created, it’s usually because the crypto market cap doubled. Each time it doubles, that is one less time that it can double before it reaches the cap of replacing fiat currency and becoming all money. It will probably stop doubling long before then, because major governments are much more willing to violently defend their fiat currency than most people seem to be aware of.
Also, each time it doubles, media attention also roughly doubles. So the more prevalent crypto is in your mind, the less room for growth remains.
There are even stronger reasons why crypto is obviously a very bad strategy for increasing money, but I am not willing to talk about them in a public forum. However, “trying to become a crypto billionaire” is a much worse idea than it sounds. If watching Silicon Valley turned you off to becoming a genius tech billionaire, then you should know that the crypto approach is so much worse in every way.
“It will probably stop doubling long before then, because major governments are much more willing to violently defend their fiat currency than most people seem to be aware of.”
I think this is wrong as logic, and very few countries are in that position. Most countries borrow in foreign currency anyways, so don’t really care that much. The few that do not (US, EU) are very unlikely to attack a business sector which is increasingly politically engaged and supported, much less ignore rule of law in order to address an economic issue that isn’t directly threatening anyone.
On the other hand, yes, I think that the near term market cap is effectively bounded at a level far below that of “all money”—though I’ll caution that my track record predicting crypto is far worse than my other predictions, so take it with a huge grain of salt.
It looks like the implication here is that spending large amounts of money on altcoins, and then earnng to give if you get lucky, is one of the best things an EA can do.
This is not true; becoming a crypto billionaire is a losing strategy. Every time crypto billionaires are created, it’s usually because the crypto market cap doubled. Each time it doubles, that is one less time that it can double before it reaches the cap of replacing fiat currency and becoming all money. It will probably stop doubling long before then, because major governments are much more willing to violently defend their fiat currency than most people seem to be aware of.
Also, each time it doubles, media attention also roughly doubles. So the more prevalent crypto is in your mind, the less room for growth remains.
There are even stronger reasons why crypto is obviously a very bad strategy for increasing money, but I am not willing to talk about them in a public forum. However, “trying to become a crypto billionaire” is a much worse idea than it sounds. If watching Silicon Valley turned you off to becoming a genius tech billionaire, then you should know that the crypto approach is so much worse in every way.
“It will probably stop doubling long before then, because major governments are much more willing to violently defend their fiat currency than most people seem to be aware of.”
I think this is wrong as logic, and very few countries are in that position. Most countries borrow in foreign currency anyways, so don’t really care that much. The few that do not (US, EU) are very unlikely to attack a business sector which is increasingly politically engaged and supported, much less ignore rule of law in order to address an economic issue that isn’t directly threatening anyone.
On the other hand, yes, I think that the near term market cap is effectively bounded at a level far below that of “all money”—though I’ll caution that my track record predicting crypto is far worse than my other predictions, so take it with a huge grain of salt.