Cryptocurrency

[agrabes]

The way I am thinking this through, and I could be wrong, is that the people who are going to buy NFT's for digital assets, like art, music, pictures, etc. are probably going to be the same people who are really in to crypto as well. So my thinking is that as digital NFT's become more popular, they will probably be bought by a tokens that specializes in the transactions of these digital assets.

As I am learning more about crypto in general, I am trying to find cryptocurrencies that specialize in certain markets. For example, I personally like Polymath because it specializes in the transactions of securities trading. As more retail investors appear in the market, there may be a movement by younger generations to move away from stock exchanges and in to a decentralized model of trading stocks allowing smaller investors to invest in companies, but also for small or locally owned businesses to gain access to capital. To do that, Polymath could be a medium to facilitate such transactions.

That's definitely an interesting idea. Personally, I think NFTs are primarily a fad that is already fading out. But, that's just me.

It is interesting though - that's what all this stuff is, just taking a bet on how things might change in the future. My personal strategy would be to look at which coin is most likely to hold value and be used widely in the future. All these random little coins with highly specific use cases seem likely to go away in the next few years, especially if crypto does gain more mainstream traction. The way I think of things is to ask two questions:

1) Is there a reason that a significant number of people would want to use crypto rather than regular currency? In your decentralized stock trading example, the answer is you're betting yes based on what you said about a possible future desire for decentralized stock trading.

Then question 2:

2) Is there a reason to use a specialized one off coin rather than Bitcoin or Ethereum? I don't personally see what advantage could be gained by using this Polymath coin vs. one of the main two. Using BTC or ETH would achieve the goal of being decentralized, and have the advantage of being more widely used and less likely to become worthless if one particular business fails. This Polymath thing seems like it would go to zero if the specific company and/or business model you're looking at doesn't succeed.

But, I'm also thinking about long term performance in the scale of several years, not something that you could make a quick buck from if the price jumps based on hype and you can sell and take your profit before the whole thing falls apart. If that's what you're looking to do, going for those specialized coins makes sense. Just my two cents though.

 

[SCNCY]

That's definitely an interesting idea. Personally, I think NFTs are primarily a fad that is already fading out. But, that's just me.

It is interesting though - that's what all this stuff is, just taking a bet on how things might change in the future. My personal strategy would be to look at which coin is most likely to hold value and be used widely in the future. All these random little coins with highly specific use cases seem likely to go away in the next few years, especially if crypto does gain more mainstream traction. The way I think of things is to ask two questions:

1) Is there a reason that a significant number of people would want to use crypto rather than regular currency? In your decentralized stock trading example, the answer is you're betting yes based on what you said about a possible future desire for decentralized stock trading.

Then question 2:

2) Is there a reason to use a specialized one off coin rather than Bitcoin or Ethereum? I don't personally see what advantage could be gained by using this Polymath coin vs. one of the main two. Using BTC or ETH would achieve the goal of being decentralized, and have the advantage of being more widely used and less likely to become worthless if one particular business fails. This Polymath thing seems like it would go to zero if the specific company and/or business model you're looking at doesn't succeed.

But, I'm also thinking about long term performance in the scale of several years, not something that you could make a quick buck from if the price jumps based on hype and you can sell and take your profit before the whole thing falls apart. If that's what you're looking to do, going for those specialized coins makes sense. Just my two cents though.

I am probably old school and wouldn't use these crypto markets that I described. I would probably use paper/government backed money.

But to continue the conversation about different currencies for different markets, could the Bitcoin or the Ethereum blockchain individually handle tracking every transaction from stock transactions to car ownership? I don't know. Right now in the crypto world, there seems to be a lot of competing tokens trying to accomplish similar things. Like any new market, consolidation will happen until your left with the winners. I am trying to find those tokens that handle a specific market, but one that is not too narrow, to take advantage of it. My main goal is as an investment, and therefore, I am just trying to make money. I am not really thinking of buying tokens and then using them.

Another advantage of crypto, and this is different than my strategy I listed above. But if crypto currencies become less volatile and more stable, companies could use this to avoid currency exchange fees to purchase services in other countries.

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

The way I am thinking this through, and I could be wrong, is that the people who are going to buy NFT's for digital assets, like art, music, pictures, etc. are probably going to be the same people who are really in to crypto as well. So my thinking is that as digital NFT's become more popular, they will probably be bought by a tokens that specializes in the transactions of these digital assets.

As I am learning more about crypto in general, I am trying to find cryptocurrencies that specialize in certain markets. For example, I personally like Polymath because it specializes in the transactions of securities trading. As more retail investors appear in the market, there may be a movement by younger generations to move away from stock exchanges and in to a decentralized model of trading stocks allowing smaller investors to invest in companies, but also for small or locally owned businesses to gain access to capital. To do that, Polymath could be a medium to facilitate such transactions.

Polymath looks like a good high risk bet to me. I believe tokenization is the future and Polymath is on the cutting edge with it's own regulation friendly blockchain rolling out in the next month or two I think. The new token standard ERC 1400 is cutting edge and the nodes will be run by regulated financial entities. It is the the next natural step as it is kind of a hybrid traditional/crypto solution. The protocol and smart contracts will handle all of the rules and KYC. It will reduce friction to access certain kinds of assets and reduce overall costs.

Another word on tokenization. Imagine tradable/verifiable/immutable ownership tokens in things like real estate, rare art, or venture capital. You could own a piece of a Picasso, or whatever. Pretty cool.

Having said all of that, who knows if Polymath will be around in years to come. Maybe some other tech will take its place. It's high risk/high reward. But these kinds of asymmetric bets have made many a millionaire. Best of luck and of course, DYOR.

 

[SCNCY]

@JustAnotherTimeline, the way I see my investing in crypto is that I am late to the party, so I have to find derivative investments from the original, the original being bitcoin, to invest in.

But do you think my strategy is a sound one? Anything, based on your experience that I may be missing in my strategy? I understand that this is a high risk thing to invest in.

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

I am probably old school and wouldn't use these crypto markets that I described. I would probably use paper/government backed money.

But to continue the conversation about different currencies for different markets, could the Bitcoin or the Ethereum blockchain individually handle tracking every transaction from stock transactions to car ownership? I don't know. Right now in the crypto world, there seems to be a lot of competing tokens trying to accomplish similar things. Like any new market, consolidation will happen until your left with the winners. I am trying to find those tokens that handle a specific market, but one that is not too narrow, to take advantage of it. My main goal is as an investment, and therefore, I am just trying to make money. I am not really thinking of buying tokens and then using them.

Another advantage of crypto, and this is different than my strategy I listed above. But if crypto currencies become less volatile and more stable, companies could use this to avoid currency exchange fees to purchase services in other countries.

IMO, At some point, yes, as more and more assets are tokenized with the emergence of web 3.0. Scalability issues will also need to be addressed. Probably via rollups.

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

@JustAnotherTimeline, the way I see my investing in crypto is that I am late to the party, so I have to find derivative investments from the original, the original being bitcoin, to invest in.

But do you think my strategy is a sound one? Anything, based on your experience that I may be missing in my strategy? I understand that this is a high risk thing to invest in.

All depends on your goals for the funds. What kind of $$ would you be happy with? For example, are you trying to 5x, 10x, 100x, and in what timeframe?

 

[SCNCY]

All depends on your goals for the funds. What kind of $$ would you be happy with? For example, are you trying to 5x, 10x, 100x, and in what timeframe?

This is more play money, so time horizon is long. I am not an active trader, more of a buy and hold. Of course I would like to X my money as much as possible, but if I could 10X, I'd be happy. I guess my question is more of am I thinking about my strategy correctly?

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

This is more play money, so time horizon is long. I am not an active trader, more of a buy and hold. Of course I would like to X my money as much as possible, but if I could 10X, I'd be happy. I guess my question is more of am I thinking about my strategy correctly?

I see. I have a few thoughts.

1. If this is a long term investment, you are not too late. There is no free lunch, but there are many people smarter then me who think BTC will be 500k-1million in 10 years. That's 10-20x. Ethereum will probably do pretty well during the same timeframe.

2. When investing in alt coins like polymath it's important to be realistic and have a take profit goal. There are some who disagree, but Market cap (price * supply) is a good way to compare coins. Polymath is around 500million mcap right now and ranks around 150. So a 10x would put it at 5 billion and in the 30-40 ranking range (assuming all other coins dont move). So a 10x move is a reasonable target IMO (assuming it takes off, that's a big if).

3. Now that we have established a reasonable target the next step is to compare to Ethereum. Ethereum is the alt blue chip. If you are going to buy ANYTHING not ETH you need to consider it's strength against ethereum. Otherwise, why take the risk? Here is the eth/polymath chart. It is stagnant against ethereum. Better then bleeding, but not much life.

4. Moonshot potential alts are hard to find and hard to predict. You are more likely to invest in a loser, miss the top, and be a bag holder. If you want to go full on degen start scouring twitter for microcaps of like 10-20 million market caps. That's how you turn $100 into $100,000. It's hard to find those pre-pump unless you are an insider though.

To summarize, If this is the kind of money you would be ok losing in a weekend to Vegas, by all means, target polymath (the tech is promising), or some microcap. You may get lucky in the alt coin casino. But if this is investment level allocation (more then .5-1% of your net worth) then buy btc/ethereum. There is a good chance you will be pleased with your results in 5-10 years. And you avoid the strong possibility you will be pissed at yourself for trying to "catch up". For example, imagine buying Litecoin a few years ago. It is a popular top 20 coin right now, but it's USD value is similar to 2017 levels. But it has bled OVER 90% against ethereum in the last 4 years. That is awful. And a good example of "don't overthink it".

I suppose another option could be 50%eth/45%btc/5%polymath

Others may disagree, but that is my opinion....and DYOR

HTX | The Leading Global Digital Asset Exchange

HTX provide secure,stable and reliable digital asset trading and asset management services to millions of users in over 130 countries around the world

www.huobi.com

 

[agrabes]

I am probably old school and wouldn't use these crypto markets that I described. I would probably use paper/government backed money.

But to continue the conversation about different currencies for different markets, could the Bitcoin or the Ethereum blockchain individually handle tracking every transaction from stock transactions to car ownership? I don't know. Right now in the crypto world, there seems to be a lot of competing tokens trying to accomplish similar things. Like any new market, consolidation will happen until your left with the winners. I am trying to find those tokens that handle a specific market, but one that is not too narrow, to take advantage of it. My main goal is as an investment, and therefore, I am just trying to make money. I am not really thinking of buying tokens and then using them.

Another advantage of crypto, and this is different than my strategy I listed above. But if crypto currencies become less volatile and more stable, companies could use this to avoid currency exchange fees to purchase services in other countries.

In terms of the token, whether the Ethereum/BTC block chain could handle every transition, the question I have is: Would it need to? We don't require the current conventional banking system to handle every transaction from throughout the economy within a single unbroken chain of custody. When I get my paycheck, the banking system handles the transfer of my employer's bank to my bank. Then, I could do whatever I want with that money. Withdraw it, invest in BTC, convert to foreign currency, etc. Then, I could say buy a car - that's handled using a separate payment system.

So why do we need to roll up all payment into a single system that is also the basis of the security and existence of the crypto currency itself? If I want to buy stocks with BTC or ETH, why couldn't I just transfer those coins to the broker as payment without requiring that the entire transaction take place within the same blockchain? If them using a distributed ledger/blockchain technology to invest your money is what's important, couldn't they simply have a BTC wallet to receive your BTC and then record that transaction using a smart contract?

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

In terms of the token, whether the Ethereum/BTC block chain could handle every transition, the question I have is: Would it need to? We don't require the current conventional banking system to handle every transaction from throughout the economy within a single unbroken chain of custody. When I get my paycheck, the banking system handles the transfer of my employer's bank to my bank. Then, I could do whatever I want with that money. Withdraw it, invest in BTC, convert to foreign currency, etc. Then, I could say buy a car - that's handled using a separate payment system.

So why do we need to roll up all payment into a single system that is also the basis of the security and existence of the crypto currency itself? If I want to buy stocks with BTC or ETH, why couldn't I just transfer those coins to the broker as payment without requiring that the entire transaction take place within the same blockchain? If them using a distributed ledger/blockchain technology to invest your money is what's important, couldn't they simply have a BTC wallet to receive your BTC and then record that transaction using a smart contract?

I am interested in your comments, but I don't think I am following.

1. Are you suggesting for example bitcoin could be transacted off chain? Not like a layer 2 or something, but literally off chain?

2. What does this mean? Are you referring to tokenization?

 

[agrabes]

I am interested in your comments, but I don't think I am following.

1. Are you suggesting for example bitcoin could be transacted off chain? Not like a layer 2 or something, but literally off chain?

2. What does this mean? Are you referring to tokenization?

No, I'm not saying the financial transaction should be separated or taken off chain. What I'm saying is - why is anything beyond the coin changing hands taking place on the blockchain of that particular cryptocurrency? If I'm buying stock, or whatever investment it is, on a decentralized stock exchange, why should the record of me owning that stock be rolled into the same blockchain as the record of me paying the crypto currency? That would be like saying my bank statement that shows my paycheck should also include the my paystub and timecard. Sure, it's probably possible, but why do it?

Shouldn't there be two separate blockchains here? One is the blockchain for the crypto currency itself which records that Person A agreed to give Person B the coin and that the coin is now rightfully owned by Person B. This would be the BTC or ETH blockchain which tracks how the money changes hands. There would be another blockchain or smart contract that is the record that says Person B gave Person A the stock or company ownership or whatever and that Person A now rightfully owns it. I understand it probably -could- all be combined into one, but I don't understand why anyone would want that.

If the idea is that Polymath is supposed to be a cryptocurrency that works well for these decentralized stock exchanges, and that eventually it will be so good and used so frequently that people will want to have it over BTC, ETH, USD, etc and it will become a major currency, that seems like a very very hard sell. It would be like if Vanguard said you can only buy stocks in Vanguard Bucks and expected that eventually people would start using their Vanguard bucks to buy their groceries too. Not impossible in some kind of dystopian future, but seems very unlikely and not a world I really want to see.

If the idea is that Polymath is not intended to be a true currency or commodity similar to BTC or ETH, but is instead a glorified means of internal recordkeeping using blockchain technology (i.e. you put in USD, BTC, etc, use Polymath to perform the functions of a distributed ledger to keep track of who owns what once you're in the system, then when you're ready to sell convert back to USD or BTC) then I feel like it should not be called a cryptocurrency. At that point, it's a decentralized stock exchange.

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

No, I'm not saying the financial transaction should be separated or taken off chain. What I'm saying is - why is anything beyond the coin changing hands taking place on the blockchain of that particular cryptocurrency? If I'm buying stock, or whatever investment it is, on a decentralized stock exchange, why should the record of me owning that stock be rolled into the same blockchain as the record of me paying the crypto currency? That would be like saying my bank statement that shows my paycheck should also include the my paystub and timecard. Sure, it's probably possible, but why do it?

Shouldn't there be two separate blockchains here? One is the blockchain for the crypto currency itself which records that Person A agreed to give Person B the coin and that the coin is now rightfully owned by Person B. This would be the BTC or ETH blockchain which tracks how the money changes hands. There would be another blockchain or smart contract that is the record that says Person B gave Person A the stock or company ownership or whatever and that Person A now rightfully owns it. I understand it probably -could- all be combined into one, but I don't understand why anyone would want that.

If the idea is that Polymath is supposed to be a cryptocurrency that works well for these decentralized stock exchanges, and that eventually it will be so good and used so frequently that people will want to have it over BTC, ETH, USD, etc and it will become a major currency, that seems like a very very hard sell. It would be like if Vanguard said you can only buy stocks in Vanguard Bucks and expected that eventually people would start using their Vanguard bucks to buy their groceries too. Not impossible in some kind of dystopian future, but seems very unlikely and not a world I really want to see.

If the idea is that Polymath is not intended to be a true currency or commodity similar to BTC or ETH, but is instead a glorified means of internal recordkeeping using blockchain technology (i.e. you put in USD, BTC, etc, use Polymath to perform the functions of a distributed ledger to keep track of who owns what once you're in the system, then when you're ready to sell convert back to USD or BTC) then I feel like it should not be called a cryptocurrency. At that point, it's a decentralized stock exchange.

Ahhh. I believe you are questioning the purpose of the POLYX cryptocurrency token which is the native currency of the Polymesh blockchain. Is that it in a nutshell?

In order to use the Polymesh protocol, network, features, and smart contracts you will need to pay in POLYX. I have attached the tokenomics which should provide further clarification. It's just another blockchain with its own native token trying to carve out its own niche. It is a true cryptocurrency.

Another example is the FLOW blockchain. It's another chain designed to succeed with NFTs and gaming. NBA Top Shot runs on the FLOW blockchain where transactions are paid in FLOW.

An Introduction to Polymesh Tokenomics

Read about the specific aspects of tokenomics to provide a fulsome understanding of how POLYX operates on Polymesh.

info.polymath.network

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

No, I'm not saying the financial transaction should be separated or taken off chain. What I'm saying is - why is anything beyond the coin changing hands taking place on the blockchain of that particular cryptocurrency? If I'm buying stock, or whatever investment it is, on a decentralized stock exchange, why should the record of me owning that stock be rolled into the same blockchain as the record of me paying the crypto currency? That would be like saying my bank statement that shows my paycheck should also include the my paystub and timecard. Sure, it's probably possible, but why do it?

Shouldn't there be two separate blockchains here? One is the blockchain for the crypto currency itself which records that Person A agreed to give Person B the coin and that the coin is now rightfully owned by Person B. This would be the BTC or ETH blockchain which tracks how the money changes hands. There would be another blockchain or smart contract that is the record that says Person B gave Person A the stock or company ownership or whatever and that Person A now rightfully owns it. I understand it probably -could- all be combined into one, but I don't understand why anyone would want that.

If the idea is that Polymath is supposed to be a cryptocurrency that works well for these decentralized stock exchanges, and that eventually it will be so good and used so frequently that people will want to have it over BTC, ETH, USD, etc and it will become a major currency, that seems like a very very hard sell. It would be like if Vanguard said you can only buy stocks in Vanguard Bucks and expected that eventually people would start using their Vanguard bucks to buy their groceries too. Not impossible in some kind of dystopian future, but seems very unlikely and not a world I really want to see.

If the idea is that Polymath is not intended to be a true currency or commodity similar to BTC or ETH, but is instead a glorified means of internal recordkeeping using blockchain technology (i.e. you put in USD, BTC, etc, use Polymath to perform the functions of a distributed ledger to keep track of who owns what once you're in the system, then when you're ready to sell convert back to USD or BTC) then I feel like it should not be called a cryptocurrency. At that point, it's a decentralized stock exchange.

A few more thoughts on this.

Respectfully, I am wondering if you don't entirely understand the basics of various blockchain technology, specifically ethereum? ETH and BTC are fundamentally different in so many ways that they are not really comparable.

What you suggest to eliminate (by using 2 chains) is exactly what the ethereum founders intended to create; a global decentralized computer that cannot be shut down and that anyone can use. The decentralized accounting ledgers and smart contracts were designed to be together in one chain.

Basically, there are two types of ethereum accounts, externally owned accounts (EOA) and contract accounts. EOA accounts are like the ones you and I can have without permission and for free. Contract accounts cost ethereum to setup and are for the smart contracts. EOAs can interact with each other, and with contracts. Contracts can also communicate with other contracts and EOAs.

Then you have the ethereum virtual machine (EVM). This is most important piece of the ethereum protocol. It is the computation engine that is responsible for executing the smart contracts. The EVM is also used by the network nodes to obtain block consensus.

For additional clarity, not all distributed ledger blockchains allow for smart contracts. Also, smart contracts can also be implemented without a distributed ledger.

 

[agrabes]

A few more thoughts on this.

Respectfully, I am wondering if you don't entirely understand the basics of various blockchain technology, specifically ethereum? ETH and BTC are fundamentally different in so many ways that they are not really comparable.

What you suggest to eliminate (by using 2 chains) is exactly what the ethereum founders intended to create; a global decentralized computer that cannot be shut down and that anyone can use. The decentralized accounting ledgers and smart contracts were designed to be together in one chain.

Basically, there are two types of ethereum accounts, externally owned accounts (EOA) and contract accounts. EOA accounts are like the ones you and I can have without permission and for free. Contract accounts cost ethereum to setup and are for the smart contracts. EOAs can interact with each other, and with contracts. Contracts can also communicate with other contracts and EOAs.

Then you have the ethereum virtual machine (EVM). This is most important piece of the ethereum protocol. It is the computation engine that is responsible for executing the smart contracts. The EVM is also used by the network nodes to obtain block consensus.

For additional clarity, not all distributed ledger blockchains allow for smart contracts. Also, smart contracts can also be implemented without a distributed ledger.

I will say this - I'm familiar with the general concepts of what can be done using crypto currency and blockchain technology, how it works (proof of stake vs. proof of work, 51% attack, etc), and things like that but not familiar with the exact extra capabilities of any individual coin, protocol, etc. I don't research those things, because I don't feel they provide any value. I would need to be convinced that things like smart contracts have value vs. traditional contracts or that distributed ledger blockchain technology has value vs. traditional recordkeeping for me to care about any of those capabilities. The things that interest me are security of the coin, energy efficiency of the coin, and capability to be transferred (aka used for buying/selling) in a way that is both secure and reasonably usable by people who have average technological knowledge.

I didn't know Ethereum was set up with the intent of creating the capability to tie in everything into one chain. For a general use coin, I could understand this being a nice side benefit for some things like small businesses doing ecommerce, etc if cryptocurrency ever takes off and becomes used as actual currency by a significant number of people. I don't personally believe that will ever happen in any meaningful way, but I can understand why someone would want to take the bet on it.

My whole point here though is that while I respect that some people like the ideas of things like smart contracts, distributed ledger, decentralization, etc, I have never heard a case where these things are functionally better than regular contracts, centralized currency control and banking systems, traditional recordkeeping methods, except if you believe decentralization is a value in and of itself. I don't think that people, other than crypto enthusiasts, want to have a single system that is both money and an accounting book. I think that people who are into the crypto world can go so far down the rabbit hole of novel features that they forget that just because a feature exists doesn't mean that people would want to use it.

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

I will say this - I'm familiar with the general concepts of what can be done using crypto currency and blockchain technology, how it works (proof of stake vs. proof of work, 51% attack, etc), and things like that but not familiar with the exact extra capabilities of any individual coin, protocol, etc. I don't research those things, because I don't feel they provide any value. I would need to be convinced that things like smart contracts have value vs. traditional contracts or that distributed ledger blockchain technology has value vs. traditional recordkeeping for me to care about any of those capabilities. The things that interest me are security of the coin, energy efficiency of the coin, and capability to be transferred (aka used for buying/selling) in a way that is both secure and reasonably usable by people who have average technological knowledge.

I didn't know Ethereum was set up with the intent of creating the capability to tie in everything into one chain. For a general use coin, I could understand this being a nice side benefit for some things like small businesses doing ecommerce, etc if cryptocurrency ever takes off and becomes used as actual currency by a significant number of people. I don't personally believe that will ever happen in any meaningful way, but I can understand why someone would want to take the bet on it.

My whole point here though is that while I respect that some people like the ideas of things like smart contracts, distributed ledger, decentralization, etc, I have never heard a case where these things are functionally better than regular contracts, centralized currency control and banking systems, traditional recordkeeping methods, except if you believe decentralization is a value in and of itself. I don't think that people, other than crypto enthusiasts, want to have a single system that is both money and an accounting book. I think that people who are into the crypto world can go so far down the rabbit hole of novel features that they forget that just because a feature exists doesn't mean that people would want to use it.

Fair enough. You are certainly not alone in your assessment. I am definitely crypto cult material so my opinion is the opposite of yours. Basically, this whole conversation boils down to whether or not you believe web 3.0 will come to fruition in any meaningful way. Personally, I think it will develop alongside web 2.0. It seems unlikely that it will actually replace web 2.0. However, I think you may be underplaying all that web 3.0 could offer. Time will tell I suppose. If you are not familiar with web 3.0, here is a recent general article that is pretty fair to both sides.

People are talking about Web3. Is it the Internet of the future or just a buzzword?

In the Web3 vision of the internet's future, tech giants like Facebook and Google aren't as critical. The internet instead is a peer-to-peer experience built on what's known as the blockchain.

www.npr.org

 

[cymonw1980]

Anyone else invest in cryptocurrencies yet? I'm just starting out and wondering if anyone had advice for buying and trading.

I have started to... but (imo) you have to do a fair amount of research and try to understand the problem the cryptocurrency your investing in will solve. Then, how big is that problem? What other offerings are out there to solve this? How long will it take to deliver significant value? etc.

In the end, I view it as more of an educated gamble than an investment... I would only put money in you can afford to lose and I would take a profit when possible.

My plan is to make a few small investments (educated gambles), try to get all the money I put in back... and then invest the profits off those initial investments. Once they grow, repeat.

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

I have started to... but (imo) you have to do a fair amount of research and try to understand the problem the cryptocurrency your investing in will solve. Then, how big is that problem? What other offerings are out there to solve this? How long will it take to deliver significant value? etc.

In the end, I view it as more of an educated gamble than an investment... I would only put money in you can afford to lose and I would take a profit when possible.

My plan is to make a few small investments (educated gambles), try to get all the money I put in back... and then invest the profits off those initial investments. Once they grow, repeat.

I would personally caution people with the "invest what you can afford to lose narrative" when it comes to heavyweights bitcoin/ethereum. It is becoming more and more common financial advice to put a small portion of your portfolio into crypto. This could be mining stocks, GBTC, EFTs, spot ethereum or bitcoin, coinbase stock, etc. Just my 2 cents.

Here's How Much of Your Investing Portfolio Should Be in Crypto, According to 5 Experts

Cryptocurrency is a volatile, high-risk investment. That’s why many experts stick to the 5% rule.

time.com

 

[BryceC]

I do think Ethereum needs to be a little careful. The gas fees are absurd. They are getting away with it for now but you look at something Binance Smart Chain doing something very, very similiar with much lower fees and quicker processing times. Crypto gaming still largely takes place on Ethereum and I think that generates a lot of their fees but IMO those fees are way overpriced right now and that could negatively effect the price.

 

[markshir]

Should have, but never got around to it? Did you get the ENS airdrop?

I want to now, but really don't want to pay the gas. I assume it's not cheap right now.

It's 5/year to pick one up plus about 100 in gas if you set it low overnight.

Gocyclones.eth

 

[JustAnotherTimeline]

I do think Ethereum needs to be a little careful. The gas fees are absurd. They are getting away with it for now but you look at something Binance Smart Chain doing something very, very similiar with much lower fees and quicker processing times. Crypto gaming still largely takes place on Ethereum and I think that generates a lot of their fees but IMO those fees are way overpriced right now and that could negatively effect the price.

Totally agree. Ethereum is unusable for the little guy like me. To send funds is one thing, but to engage with a dapp is ridiculous. Hopefully Ethereum 2.0 in 2022 will solve this problem as they are saying.

One thing to note, Binance Smart Chain has only 21 validators. It is the most centralized layer 1 blockchain. There is a reason it is fast and cheap. I use it all the time, but it is apples and oranges when it comes to comparison to ethereum since ethereum is the most decentralized blockchain after bitcoin, by far.