- Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett lambasted Wall Street for encouraging speculative behavior in the stock market, effectively turning it into a “gambling parlor.”
- Buffett, 91, spoke at length during his annual shareholder meeting Saturday about one of his favorite targets for criticism: investment banks and brokerages.
- “Wall Street makes money, one way or another, catching the crumbs that fall off the table of capitalism,” Buffett said. “They don’t make money unless people do things, and they get a piece of them. They make a lot more money when people are gambling than when they are investing.”
Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett lambasted Wall Street for encouraging speculative behavior in the stock market, effectively turning it into a “gambling parlor.” Buffett, 91, spoke at length during his annual shareholder meeting Saturday about one of his favorite targets for criticism: investment banks and brokerages. “Wall Street makes money, one way or another, catching the crumbs that fall off the table of capitalism,” Buffett said. “They don’t make money unless people do things, and they get a piece of them. They make a lot more money when people are gambling than when they are investing.” Buffett bemoaned that large American companies have “became poker chips” for market speculation. He cited soaring use of call options, saying that brokers make more money from these bets than simple investing. Still, the situation can result in market dislocations that give Berkshire Hathaway an opportunity, he said. Buffett said that Berkshire spent an incredible $41 billion on stocks in the first quarter, unleashing his company’s cash hoard after an extended lull. Some $7 billion of that went to snap up shares of Occidental, bringing up his stake to more than 14% of the oil producer’s shares. “That’s why markets do crazy things, and occasionally Berkshire gets a chance to do something,” Buffett said. “It’s almost a mania of speculation,” Charlie Munger, 98, Buffett’s long-time partner and Berkshire Hathaway vice chairman, chimed in. “We have people who know nothing about stocks being advised by stock brokers who know even less,” Munger said. “It’s an incredible, crazy situation. I don’t think any wise country would want this outcome. Why would you want your country’s stock to trade on a casino?” Retail traders flooded into the stock market during the pandemic, boosting share prices to records. Last year, the frenzy was fueled further by meme-inspired trading from Reddit message boards. But the stock market has turned this year, putting many of those new at-home traders in the red. The Nasdaq Composite, which holds many of the favorite names of small traders, is in a bear market, down more than 23% from its high after an April crush. Warren Buffett has a long history of deriding investment bankers and their institutions –saying that they encourage mergers and spinoffs to reap fees, rather than improve companies. He typically shuns investment bankers for his acquisitions, calling them pricey “money shufflers.” Buffett’s $848.02 per share offer for insurer Alleghany reportedly excludes Goldman’s advisory fee. Earlier in the session, he noted that Berkshire would always be cash-rich, and in times of need, would be “better than the banks” at extending credit lines to companies. An audience member made an inaudible comment while he was talking. “Was that a banker screaming?” Buffett joked. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/30/warren-buffett-rips-wall-street-for-turning-the-stock-market-into-a-gambling-parlor.html.... Warren Buffett is notorious for his famous quotations and this piece is no exception: “Wall Street makes money, one way or another, catching the crumbs that fall off the table of capitalism,” Buffett said. “They don’t make money unless people do things, and they get a piece of them. They make a lot more money when people are gambling than when they are investing.”
Buffett bemoaned that large American companies have “became poker chips” for market speculation. He cited soaring use of call options, saying that brokers make more money from these bets than simple investing.
“That’s why markets do crazy things, and occasionally Berkshire gets a chance to do something,” Buffett said.
“It’s almost a mania of speculation,” Charlie Munger, 98, Buffett’s long-time partner and Berkshire Hathaway vice chairman, chimed in.
“We have people who know nothing about stocks being advised by stock brokers who know even less,” Munger said. “It’s an incredible, crazy situation. I don’t think any wise country would want this outcome. Why would you want your country’s stock to trade on a casino?” These comments resonate with crashes and market failures in 2022. Even bitcoin's trading cycles might be defined in terms of rampant speculation and assets being traded like "chips in a casino". If the wealthiest and most successful stock traders in Warren Buffett is currently unhappy with current market conditions and trading behavior. Is there much hope for average investors having profitable runs in stocks, bonds or traditional finance? Is it accurate to say that investment has come to more closely resemble casinos or gambling parlors than areas of investment? |
|
|
|
this is not to do with ETF's
this is due to the flaws of stockmarkets.. revealed by the robinhood system (run on the "game" stock saga) a few years back
basically instead of buying stock direct from the wall street stock markets. there are 'darkpools' of stock holders that sell 'parts' of their stock to other markets. thus allowing robinhood to do microstock trading
these darkpools are not trusts of stock asset that then sell shares of a trust company/brand(ETF). .. its darkpools that sell shares of the stock itself (smaller decimals of stock than the wallstreet stock exchange allowed)
these proposals are to kill off the need of these darkpools and bring the sub/micro stock markets back into the fold of the wallstreet stock market directly. thus they can regulate the microstock markets under institutions rather than these 'darkpools'
I think ETFs also have an internal payment and order flow system, allowing for tax breaks on trades. This format is one of the things that makes ETFs such an attractive option. Dark pools were originally created under HFT algorithmic trading conducted by hedge funds and large investment banks, if I remember correctly. There were big profits earned in the early days when HFT arbitrage trading was a new concept. Have not seen a headline mentioning HFT revenues in many years. Only lawsuits alleging theft of HFT code. Did brokers like robinhood adopt a similar format? I guess they might earn extra profits through a process of arb? They might emulate some facets of hedge fund HFT trading that way. But to be honest, I paid zero attention to robinhood. All I remember is robinhood froze trading of gamestop. Which would appear to suggest the two might be related. |
|
|
|
|
It could be fair to say markets and commodities denominated in fiat have become dominated by short term gains. No one cares if capital gains taxes reward HODLing of assets. The overwhelming majority of finance and economics revolves around fast money.
This created a vacuum in markets emphasizing the creation of long term value which was leveraged by crypto. Stablecoins and deflationary assets like bitcoin might be considered some of the main pillars propping up the market cap and overall integrity of crypto. The strongest assets of which, are designed to build long term value and stability. By the same token (no pun intended) the weakest and most unreliable portions of crypto markets were oriented around short term gains.
Fiat vs crypto might be described as having different fundamental design philosophies: short term gains vs long term value.
The same lense might be directed at things like KYC and AML in terms of cost effectiveness and results. While central banks might deploy those policies, there is a potential for them to be more damaging to their financial goals over the long term, in contrast to any perceived benefits they provide. Do banks or governments have to care if people living in poverty in nigeria earned $5 additional capital through crypto? Is it so important that they must implement AML and KYC? Or could it be more damaging to bank policy over the long term, as consumers chafe under the policy? I honestly have not the slightest clue.
|
|
|
|
There is a question as to whether morality can exist in a world where moral behavior is lawfully required or incentively rewarded. Let's say that a person goes 1 full year without breaking any traffic laws. They are incentively rewarded by paying 5% lower income taxes and a lump sum bonus of exclusive deflationary CBDC which they can HODL under the expectation of it accumulating value over their lifetime. (This CBDC in theory, could only be earned and accumulated through good behavior, on a public ledger which would routinely be independently scrutinized, it could also only be sold exclusively back to the state at a higher price than when it was received, at which time the coins would be destroyed. The state would hold $1 trillion in coin reserves, which could routinely be sold off at regular intervals to fund coin buy backs. Not 100% certain on the format, but in essence it would be a deflationary and scarce commodity which appreciated in value over time) Would following traffic laws still be a moral act? Or could they become motivated by greed and material gain, which could transform the act of following traffic laws into an immoral act? What would happen if this precedent were applied to areas outside of traffic laws. Its an old concept but still might be interesting to consider. .... Here are a few other decent resources on the topic. |
|
|
|
|
Personally, I would like steam engines to make a comeback.
If it were possible to use curved mirrors to use sunlight to heat steam inside a boiler, then scavenge exhaust water vapor inside a closed loop system to recirculate moisture. That could be a good blueprint for low carbon emission and long term reliable energy generation. While solar panels might last 20 to 40 years under optimal conditions. There are known cases of steam engines having lifespans greater than 100 years.
Metals science has advanced from the days when steam locomotives were the backbone of trade. Its possible enough progress has been made to completely replace coal as the primary energy solution for steam power.
A steam engine that needs only water and sunlight could be a decent concept worth pursuing, at least for some applications.
The next stage would be a simple battery format with a longer lifespan than current lead acid or lithium cells.
|
|
|
|
|
I think public opinion and support and the best levers for implementing positive social change. With positive social change being a slow moving trend that can take hundreds or thousands of years to become a reality.
They say that it took 10 years for sailors to accept the explanation of citrus fruits being legitimate treatments for scurvy. Even when the answer to life's biggest problems lies right in front of us, it can still take decades before we are willing to accept it.
Imagine walking the streets and asking people how to break the "fiat monopoly". What responses would we receive? It could naturally take time for the public to become educated on these topics. In some cases, it took thousands of years before practices like slavery were illegalized and abolished. And, it could take thousands of years more before the general public understands the necessity of things that many of us today take for granted.
Its been said that tectonic plates which compose the earth's crust move only a few inches every year. And so it is with positive social change.
|
|
|
|
The Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday voted to propose a package of rule changes, including measures that could affect, but not block, the controversial practice known as payment for order flow.n this practice, brokers send many small orders from individual investors to market makers or other venues, who compensate the brokers for the order flow. The brokerage industry argues that the practice, which is banned in several countries, offers a net saving to investors, allowing for zero-commission trades and otherwise lowering costs. The SEC has argued that the practice doesn’t offer as much benefit to investors as it should. The proposals advanced on Wednesday could affect market makers and other middlemen. The commission voted 3-2 to propose a rule that would require marketable orders of individual orders to be exposed to competition on an order-by-order basis in qualified auctions before being internalized off-exchange. Auctions would apply to marketable orders made by or on behalf of persons making trades of less than $200,000 and trading on average fewer than 40 times a day. The proposal “is designed to bring greater competition in the marketplace for retail market orders. Right now, a concentrated group of wholesalers earns significant revenues from this market,” SEC Chair Gary Gensler said in a written statement. “They’re willing to pay for this order flow, but as the release notes, investors may not be getting the benefit of full competition in this market, despite the attractiveness of their orders.” The competitive shortfall “could be worth about $1.5 billion annually, compared with current practice — money that could go back into retail investors’ pockets or portfolios,” Gensler said. Other proposals aimed at enhancing reports on how well orders are being executed and setting a best execution standard and accompanying framework for broker-dealers were also approved. The best-execution measure would require brokers to seek out markets providing the most favorable terms possible for orders. Brokers are subject to a similar rule by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Wall Street’s self-regulator. “Today, equities often trade on off-exchange dark venues that have different business models and are less transparent than the familiar lit exchanges. Such developments in our markets make best execution that much more important,” Gensler said. The SEC approved another proposal that would allow stock exchanges to execute trades in increments of less than a penny. The proposal aims to level the playing field between exchanges and off-exchange market centers, which can execute trades at narrower increments. An industry group urged caution. “We strongly believe the SEC needs to be extremely careful in its approach. Any changes being proposed in the name of competition which may tilt the playing field at the expense of investors should be weighed carefully, be subject to a robust cost-benefit analysis, and considered holistically with a view to ensuring there are no negative, unintended consequences for investors,” said Kenneth E. Bentsen, Jr., president and CEO of Sifma, a securities industry trade group. Others welcomed the measures. “We believe the reforms announced by the SEC represent a constructive and positive effort to improve transparency, increase competition, and ensure that investors can access the best prices available in the market,” said Ronan Ryan, president and co-founder of IEX Group Inc. “It has been 17 years since the existing equity rules were adopted, and since that time, the stock market has seen significant change — including the advent of high-frequency trading, a dramatic decline in displayed liquidity on exchange, and a substantial rise in off-exchange trading. Modernizing regulation ensures that market competition among brokers, market makers, and exchanges continues to benefit investors,” he said. The proposals are subject to a period of public comment. Separately, the SEC voted 5-0 to approve new measures that would apply to executive officers and other corporate insiders trading in their own company’s shares. The new measures will require insiders to wait up to four months after adopting a trading plan before they can act on it. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/sec-votes-to-propose-major-overhaul-of-us-stock-trading-rules/ar-AA15gDsd .... This is interesting. While they don't mention specifics, I would wonder if this applies to ETFs (exchange traded funds). As well as some of the known loopholes which exist in the way ETFs transact trades. Which make them a sought after vehicle for investment. More new and big changes loom on the horizon. Will these adjustments improve circumstances for investors and the economy? I would be curious to know what people think about this. Would anyone consider the current trading format of stocks to be broken? If so, what reforms would they propose to address current flaws? It appears that the SEC is beginning a campaign of their own to reform the way stocks are traded in the united states. From this short article, one might guess what some of the long term implications could be. If anyone wants a hint as to what this might mean, think about the gamestop incident and retail traders. As it is entirely possible that this latest overhaul could be at least partially in response to that. |
|
|
|
I seem to remember making a thread about binance's USDC stablecoin gaining an option to receive funding from the federal reserve prior to the release of news story posted in OP. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5427220.msg61414675#msg61414675Did they know binance's audit wouldn't return positive results ahead of time? At which time they scrambled to secure additional funding for assets like USDC? The most likely scenario is binance having assets tied up with FTX, which were unfortunately destroyed during the crash. The behavior of assets invested in FTX would behave like the popping of a bubble. Which would foster wealth destruction, with no way of redeeming lost value. |
|
|
|
Question: Which current day assets are most likely to trend upwards with high inflation, recession or depression looming on the horizon? Answer: Deflationary assets, in cases where reductions in supply are expected. In practice, this might apply to the following. - Fossil fuels
- Food and Agriculture
- Parts and Components Restricted By Supply Chains
- Guns and Ammunition
- Water
Supply of fossil fuels is declining off of a number of factors, which could contribute to appreciation in value. Supply of food and agriculture are generally declining, contributing to higher prices. Parts and components are declining in supply, due to restrictions imposed by the recent USA vs china trade war. Guns and ammunition supplies could decline due to newly introduced gun regulation, lawsuits and restrictions. Water shortages are becoming a bigger issue globally, due to drought and a number of other factors. While it is unfortunate that many of these negative trends are contributing towards overall reductions in standard of living for people across the globe. These negative trends could also be profitable for some in terms of investment or businesses which cater to shifts in supply and demand.
|
|
|
|
Yes the solution is simple to provide liquity to markets One way to inject liquidity into markets and the economy, is to reduce requirements and restrictions on loans. However, if we look at current market conditions, we see that interest rates on loans are rising to help banks cope with rising inflation. This creates a vicious cycle where inflation forces banks to raise interest rates on loans higher. While economic analysts and experts might support greater credit and liquidity on the basis of small businesses generally being responsible for upwards of 50% of new job creation. Eras of high inflation make it difficult to extend credit and liquidity to the areas where its needed most. If the goal of credit and liquidity is achieved. It may need to be done outside of inflation and interest rates. Perhaps there are crypto options for this which could be developed. Or perhaps there are other formats that would work as well. |
|
|
|
FTX’s bankruptcy-era CEO, John J. Ray III, appointed to shepherd the collapsed crypto exchange through Chapter 11 reorganization, testified on Tuesday that the company’s founder and former CEO, Sam Bankman-Fried, made multiple misstatements about his companies’ financials.Ray, who oversaw Enron’s infamous corporate fraud, characterized FTX’s actions as “old fashioned embezzlement.” “This is just taking money from customers and using it for your own purpose," Ray said. "Not sophisticated at all,” he said, explaining that what might have been sophisticated about the scheme was hiding it in plain sight. Ray’s testimony may also have shed light on the theories that underlie the Justice Department's accusations against Bankman-Fried, who was charged with eight counts of wire fraud, securities fraud, and conspiracy in an indictment unsealed on Tuesday. The agency’s criminal charges, which allege that Bankman-Fried misappropriated customer funds by allowing the funds to be used by his crypto hedge fund Alameda Research, require it to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bankman-Fried knew and intended to lie about the arrangement to customers or lenders. The FTX chief's testimony came before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Financial Services Committee, where Bankman-Fried was also scheduled to testify via video conference. However, the public’s opportunity to hear testimony from the embattled founder foreclosed after he was arrested Monday evening by Bahamian authorities. Bahamian authorities took Bankman-Fried into custody at the request of the U.S. Justice Department on Monday night, based on its indictment originally filed under seal. In the indictment, the DOJ charged Bankman-Fried with wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud against FTX customers and lenders, conspiracy to commit commodities fraud and securities fraud, conspiracy to violate money laundering laws, and conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government through violations of campaign finance laws. In separate civil actions filed Tuesday, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and the U.S. Commodity and Futures Trading Commission, respectively, alleged Bankman-Fried violated securities laws and the Commodity Exchange Act and the agency's regulations. Asked if there's any way that Bankman-Fried and FTX’s senior managers wouldn’t have known that its entities had commingled customer funds, allowing Alameda unlimited access to FTX customer accounts, Ray III said, “No.” In an interview at the New York Times' Dealbook Summit, Bankman-Fried said he didn’t “knowingly commingle [customer] funds.” He added that he “didn’t ever try to commit fraud on anyone,” that he “wasn’t “running Alameda,” and “didn’t know what was going on.” Ray was also asked about contentions in Bankman-Fried’s leaked prepared hearing remarks which suggested FTX was solvent but for a run on the bank caused when Binance walked away from a planned investment in FTX, and that FTX US remains solvent and capable of paying off all of its customers. Bankman-Fried also tweeted the claim on November 10, the day before the exchange’s bankruptcy filing. “Given the evidence you’ve gathered, is there any degree of truth to this claim,” Georgia Rep. Barry Loudermilk asked Ray. “We still have a hole in the U.S., so as we sit here today it is not solvent. That's just inaccurate. And I'm not sure how he would even know that, quite honestly. We're hopeful,” Ray said. “Prior to that episode, is your belief that FTX was solvent?” Ohio Rep. Anthony Gonzalez asked about Binance’s about-face. “No,” Ray replied. Missouri Rep. Ann Wagner asked Ray if the transfer of FTX funds to Alameda could have been done by mistake, given that Bankman-Fried has publicly apologized for making mistakes in leading his companies. “I don't find any such statements to be credible,” Ray III said. Rep. Wagner went on to say that FTX’s international trading platform, FTX.com, held itself out as having a sophisticated risk management system commensurate with the size of his operations. “I can say that it's absolutely false. There was no sophistication whatsoever,” Ray III said. “There was an absence of any management.” https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ftx-ceo-says-company-engaged-in-old-fashioned-embezzlement-under-sbf-023334039.html .... More negative press on SBF. No one's trying to sugarcoat anything, "old fashioned embezzlement" is what they're calling it. If I was planning to do something like what SBF did. I would be scared out of my mind and probably try hard to take steps to protect myself and those involved. I don't understand how SBF can taunt people on social media over the FTX crash. Then have no concerns or fear that some of his questionable choices might backfire on him. How could anyone be so indifferent and unaware of the deep hole he was digging for himself. Until it was too late. Is there a chance SBF receives a minor slap on the wrist and short prison time. Or did his luck wear thin here, with him due to receive a more severe penalty? |
|
|
|
|
The cynic in me thinks the HDD could easily have been compacted, shredded and destroyed by now. Whether by normal landfill processes, or exposure to the elements.
But then I remember reading news stories about data being recovered from HDDs inside the World Trade Centers during 9/11 attacks and HDDs inside the space shuttle columbia which unfortunately exploded (R.I.P.).
If data can be recovered from an HDD located inside a building with 110 floors that was utterly destroyed. Maybe he has a chance of finding his long lost HDD inside of a landfill, after all? HDDs could be tougher and easier to recover data from than we realize.
But if we're being serious, anyone with the resources or capital to scour landfills in search of HDDs with lost crypto don't need him as a middle man. They could already be conducting operations of their own inside landfills, as we speak, without him.
|
|
|
|
What are some better ways to manage energy consumption for casinos in these economic recession times?
Slot machines might achieve a considerable energy savings through replacement of incandescent bulbs with LEDs. Insulation of casinos might be the next area for net gains. Translating to reduced heating and cooling costs. The next consideration might be water. Given recent droughts and water shortages. Especially for regions like las vegas which are known to have local sources of water like lake mead in the process of drying up. And of course energy generation would fall somewhere near the most expensive options for achieving efficiency and cleaner emissions. With new power plant projects being expensive enough to fall outside the budget of most casinos. In the realm of oddball ideas would be movements like energy scavenging. Installing deck plates in the floor of casinos attached to generators to allow harvesting of energy from the weight of clients walking across them. |
|
|
|
The series of about a dozen group texts between Zhao and Bankman-Fried on Nov. 10, which were obtained by The New York Times, show that key crypto leaders feared that the situation could get even worse.The day before the embattled cryptocurrency exchange FTX filed for bankruptcy, Changpeng Zhao, the chief executive of the rival exchange Binance, sent an alarmed text to Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX's founder. Zhao was concerned that Bankman-Fried was orchestrating crypto trades that could send the industry into a meltdown. "Stop now, don't cause more damage," Zhao wrote in a group chat with Bankman-Fried and other crypto executives Nov. 10. "The more damage you do now, the more jail time." FTX and its sister hedge fund, Alameda Research, had just collapsed after a run on deposits exposed an $8 billion hole in the exchange's accounts. The implosion unleashed a crypto crisis, as firms with ties to FTX teetered on the brink of bankruptcy, calling the future of the entire industry into question. The series of about a dozen group texts between Zhao and Bankman-Fried on Nov. 10, which were obtained by The New York Times, show that key crypto leaders feared that the situation could get even worse. Their frantic communications offer a glimpse into how business is conducted behind the scenes in the industry, with at least three top officials from rival companies exchanging messages in a group on the encrypted messaging app Signal. The texts also show that industry leaders were acutely aware that the actions of a single firm or fluctuations in the value of one virtual currency could destabilize the whole industry. The exchanges became increasingly tense as Bankman-Fried and Zhao traded barbs. Earlier that week, Zhao had agreed to buy FTX and save the exchange, before backing out of the deal. In the Nov. 10 texts, he appeared certain that FTX would not survive, and concerned that it could bring the rest of the industry down with it. During a crypto crash in May, two coins had plunged in value, triggering an industrywide meltdown and forcing several prominent firms into bankruptcy. In the Nov. 10 texts, Zhao specifically accused Bankman-Fried of using his hedge fund to drive down the price of Tether, a so-called stablecoin whose price is designed to remain at $1. Tether, which is issued by a company with the same name, is a linchpin of crypto trading worldwide and is commonly used by digital asset enthusiasts to conduct transactions. Industry insiders have long feared that if Tether's price fell, it would cause a domino effect that might bring the industry to its knees. (Tether ultimately did not end up losing its $1 peg.) A spokesperson for Binance declined to comment on the text exchanges. In a statement, Bankman-Fried, 30, said Zhao's claims were "absurd." "Trades of that size would not make a material impact on Tether's pricing, and to my knowledge neither myself nor Alameda has ever attempted to intentionally depeg Tether or any other stablecoins," he said. "I have made a number of mistakes over the past year but this is not one of them." A spokesperson for Tether said in a statement that the company had "demonstrated its resilience to attacks." She added that FTX's actions "don't reflect the ethos and commitment of an entire industry." FTX, a marketplace where people could buy and sell digital currencies, collapsed early last month when customers rushed to withdraw deposits, partly in response to tweets by Zhao that called the company's finances into question. FTX soon folded, sparking investigations by the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission into whether the crypto exchange had broken the law by using its customers' funds to prop up Alameda. The Justice Department is also investigating whether Bankman-Fried engaged in market manipulation in the spring by making trades that contributed to the failure of two prominent cryptocurrencies. For years, critics of the crypto industry have said that Tether could also be vulnerable to a collapse. Tether has long claimed its stablecoins are backed by cash and other traditional assets, and that in a crisis, all its customers could redeem their coins for the equivalent amount in dollars. But regulators have previously accused Tether of lying about the status of its reserves, sowing doubts about the coin's reliability. In one of the Nov. 10 messages to the group chat, Zhao pointed out a $250,000 trade by Alameda that he said was designed to destabilize Tether. The trade was visible on the blockchain, a public ledger of cryptocurrency transactions that anyone can view. In response to Zhao's accusations, Bankman-Fried seemed nonplused. "Huh?" he said. "What am I doing to stablecoins?" "Are you claiming that you think that $250k of USDT trading would depeg it?" he added, using a common shorthand to refer to the Tether currency. Zhao responded that he didn't think a trade of that size would succeed in destroying Tether, but that it could still cause problems. "My honest advice: stop doing everything," Zhao said. "Put on a suit, and go back to DC, and start to answer questions." "Thanks for the advice!" Bankman-Fried shot back. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/inside-the-frantic-texts-exchanged-by-binance-ceo-and-sam-bankman-fried-as-ftx-collapsed/articleshow/96104947.cms .... I don't know what to think about this. The day before the embattled cryptocurrency exchange FTX filed for bankruptcy, Changpeng Zhao, the chief executive of the rival exchange Binance, sent an alarmed text to Sam Bankman-Fried, FTX's founder.
Zhao was concerned that Bankman-Fried was orchestrating crypto trades that could send the industry into a meltdown. "Stop now, don't cause more damage," Zhao wrote in a group chat with Bankman-Fried and other crypto executives Nov. 10. "The more damage you do now, the more jail time." Supposedly, the above text exchange between SBF and Changpeng Zhao of binance, was collected and published by the new york times. When COVID hit, I read hundreds, if not thousands, of different articles and watched what documentaries I could find published on the topic. To try to get a better idea of what was happening. With SBF and the FTX crash, I'm doing my best to completely ignore everything about it. But it seems, I randomly stumble across many published pieces like the above which are difficult to believe are real. |
|
|
|
The Fintech Open Source Foundation has found banks and other financial organizations are no longer just using open-source software, they're building and sharing it.At the Open Source in Finance Forum (OSFF) in New York City, the Fintech Open Source Foundation (FINOS) Dec. 8 announced the results of its 2022 State of Open Source in Financial Services Survey. The results were -- to no one's surprise -- that financial companies are now largely embracing open-source software. While crypto-currency pushes blockchain technologies' limits and makes the headlines, financial services companies are known for their conservative approach to software development. That doesn't mean they've been unfriendly to Linux and open source. It's been quite the opposite. For example, high-frequency trading was born from open-source software in the late 2000s, and in the same years, the world's stock exchanges moved to Linux. What's been changing more recently is that the world's money managers are now creating as well as using open-source software. One reason for this shift is that, as Broadridge CTO Roger Burkhardt put it, between inflation and recession, "financial companies need to save money and open-source development helps them do that. … Open source becomes irresistibly attractive to developers and IT decision-makers who are being asked to do more with a whole lot less." Oh, wait! Burkhardt said that about the 2008 housing bubble financial collapse! My point is when times get bad, open source works best. Another major reason for open source's success is its promotion within companies has become more organized. Companies with Open Source Program Offices (OSPOs) are more than twice as likely to encourage open-source consumption, and nearly three times as likely to encourage open-source contribution. So it is that financial services software committers have increased by 43%. Financial open source, however, isn't quite like the rest of the open-source programmer world. Just over half of financial services code is written in Java. In the rest of GitHub's open-source programs, Java accounts for only 11%. That's because financial services firms have been tried and true Java users for decades. They aren't going to be dropping Java -- or COBOL -- anytime soon. So it is, said Gabriele Columbro, FINOS' Executive Director, that open-source adoption is continuing "laying out the necessary building blocks for an organic, growing, and sustainable open community in the industry. While we know there is still a lot of work to do to reach full maturity, we're extremely proud of the major role that FINOS played in opening up financial services to the disruptive innovation benefits open source can deliver to this sector." Part of that work is that compared with other sectors, such as IT, science, and telecom, financial service companies lag behind in encouraging open-source contribution. Still, more than half (54%) of respondents say contributing to open source improved the quality of the software they are currently using. In addition, active participation in open source was cited as a key factor in recruiting and retaining IT talent. Of course, there's still the bugaboo that open-source software is less secure than proprietary programs. Still, even this delusion is slowly passing away. Still, it's good that 77% of those surveyed agreed that organizations should be actively contributing to open source in an effort to improve security. In fact, in the aftermath of the Log4Shell security disaster, the financial services industry reacted more swiftly and efficiently than any other industry. On another side of the financial industry, the venture capitalists have decided open source in finance is a big deal. VC-backed commercial open-source fintech startups, such as Moov, OpenBB, and a16z, now see fintech as the next industry that open source will disrupt. From what I saw at the conference, 2023 will be the year when the financial sector once and for all becomes not merely a star open-source user, but a champion open-source developer as well. https://www.zdnet.com/finance/the-future-of-finance-belongs-to-open-source/ .... Of course, there's still the bugaboo that open-source software is less secure than proprietary programs. Still, even this delusion is slowly passing away. Over the last 20 years, it has become common to promote the concept of peer review in science. Many consider peer review one of the central pillars guaranteeing the validity and accuracy of science. Is it fair to say that open source software movements are virtually identical to peer review in software engineering? Source code is openly published and can be scrutinized by independent reviewers. Which in turn produces more reliable software, in a process identical to peer review in empirical science. As a high percentage of open source business models revolve around revenues gained through support, it greatly streamlines the development process translating to open source software which is developed efficiently enough that developers in the past have literally given it away for free. As was and is the case with linux and other freely available operating systems and applications. One thing that is surprising to me is that we haven't seen more open source software in crypto. It seems as if the two paths of open source software and crypto development are aligned in ways which could be mutually beneficial. |
|
|
|
the specialists said that we will have this somewhere in 15-30 years.
Our working prototype for fusion energy is the sun. It uses its immense gravity and powerful magnetic field to keep the fusion process contained and prevent energy loss. The result is a fusion reaction which is extremely efficient, which can be sustained over long periods of time. Scientists have tried to recreate this process in a way which can be miniaturized and contained as an energy source. I think their biggest obstacle is containment and insulation to prevent energy creep. Their goal is to recreate the containment properties the sun exhibits. Currently, their containment is based on generating powerful magnetic fields. Which is the reason behind their process not being as efficient as they would like it to be. It is possible that unless more efficient methods of containment are devised, fusion energy might never be feasible. The sun can solve this problem by simply having a massive amount of mass and rotating metal core which produce powerful magnetic containment. We need something similar that can be scaled down in size, and not consume a ton of energy. To sustain the process long term. Its definitely not an easy obstacle to solve. |
|
|
|
#1 How about you go back to one of your countless threads in which you ask yourself this identical question - or show us with your own example how this whole operation, which we can call "from seed to product" works in practice?
#2 Again, I ask you to show with a concrete example the famous tokenization of everything in the world
#1 I have done it. But rather than sell for profit, I wound up eating my produce instead. What would you like to know about it? Do I get credit for predicting the price of agriculture was going up and recommending others invest in the sector? #2 You shouldn't have to ask for information or examples, you should already know the answer. I'll give you one example: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5423456.msg61353854#msg61353854There you see the african nation of ghana choosing to make oil payments in gold rather than its native currency the ceti. Making payments in gold allows it to avoid inefficiencies and losses due to inflation. The same could be said of stablecoins pegged to agriculture. Buying potatos in a stablecoin pegged directly to the commodity would make it possible to circumvent inflation virtually identical to ghana using gold to avoid inflation on their own native currency. A stablecoin pegged to 5 pounds of potatos is the same no matter which direction inflation trends. Which could be useful for protecting the cost of agricultural produce from inflation. However, a stablecoin like this would not be protected from trends in supply. |
|
|
|
This past year, 39% of American professionals participated in freelance work, either part-time or full-time, according to Upworks new survey of 3,000 adults. Thats equivalent to 60 million Americans, up 3 percentage points since 2021 and a record high since Upwork has performed said survey starting in 2014. In 2021, only 36% of the workforce was freelancing. But in 2022, as people continued to want flexibility, freelancing became more appealing and essential. It all represents a shifting mindset in the workforce, Margaret Lilani, VP of talent solutions at Upwork tells Fortune. Now, more than ever, professionals are questioning the old and traditional aspects of work and looking for something better, she says. People want to do what they love, have more control over their careers, and determine where, when, and how they work. The autonomous nature of freelancing becomes more evident as more companies usher in a return to office. While remote work opportunities might be waning, the desire to have the freedom that working from home granted remains appealing 73% of respondents said schedule flexibility was a key reason they pursued freelance work, and 69% said the same for location flexibility. The idea of being ones own boss was also appealing to many (0%). But, the real appeal to freelancing is quite simple: Money. A majority of respondents (83%) cited earning extra money as the top reason for freelancing, and 73% cited control over ones financial goals and future. Dealing with inflation and stagnant wages, more Americans are looking to side gigs in order to stay afloat. A Bankrate survey from this past summer found that more side hustlers were dependent on their extra income to pay for everyday expenses than they were in 2019. Freelancers are also more likely to be satisfied with their pay than their non-freelancing counterparts; Upwork found that while 57% of freelancers were happy with their wages, only 42% of non-freelancers felt similarly. Perhaps due to their financial situation, the youngest generations are most likely to pursue freelancing; 43% of Gen Zers and 46% of millennials said they were freelancing this year. It makes sense, given that these generations are more likely to be in entry-level jobs that simply dont pay enough for the current cost of living. While older millennials may be in the mid-career and earning more money, theyre also in a life stage of big ticket expenses, from weddings to homeownership. Financial anxiety is high among these groups, as many dont think theyll ever be able to afford their dream lifestyle. And Gen Z has proven to be especially nervous about a looming recession, likely because a majority of them are experiencing true downfall on their own for the first time. The youngest generation is preparing for a potential recession the most, cutting down on spending, delaying purchases, working another job, and working more at a rate higher than any other generation. Sure, freelancing is about control and a changing mindset but its also about being able to pay the bills. https://fortune.com/2022/12/13/freelancing-record-high-side-gigs-millennials-gen-z/.... The following could explain how many americans are supporting themselves despite not being officially employed. This past year, 39% of American professionals participated in freelance work, either part-time or full-time, according to Upworks new survey of 3,000 adults. Thats equivalent to 60 million Americans, up 3 percentage points since 2021 and a record high since Upwork has performed said survey starting in 2014. While it is not mentioned, I am wondering how many "freelancers" earn income in crypto related ventures? Crypto being one of the bigger employment and revenue creating opportunities of recent times, is it possible that a significant segment of side hustles are crypto based ventures? Or is the trend more evenly distributed throughout ride sharing apps, amazon delivery freelancing and purely internet based activities? Generation Z appears to be the largest freelancing demographic. Which makes sense given they're probably the most internet and technology literate. I think generation Z is also the largest crypto using and supporting demographic. With concerns lingering over future job automation and lack of wage growth. Could side hustles and freelancing work represent the natural progression for the future of job markets? If this is true, then could crypto also be prominently positioned to best leverage and fulfill needed areas of freelance finance, given its flexibility, adaptability and rapid deployment capabilities. |
|
|
|
|
Installment buying is important in places disrupted by high inflation and low employment opportunities. Its a necessity to people being able to live and survive. In places like venezuela, it has been reported that many are forced to resort to installment purchasing plans to afford items which cost less than $20. In order to afford food and necessities.
I guess what makes it difficult in some regions of the world, are the interest rates. High interest payments, rather than installment buying, are likely what consumers would take issue with. Borrowing is another popular plan in high inflation regions. In cases where interest rates are lower than inflation, loans become an increasingly better prospect to consumers. The way this works is, if a loan is taken out with 5% annual interest and inflation is 10%. Money is devaluing at a greater rate, than interest, which makes it easier to pay off.
|
|
|
|
|
OP is saying that digital money is mere electronic data, paper money is mere wood pulp. While intrinsically backed assets like real estate are legitimate and real money?
That's not far from what precious metals investors have been saying for a few years now.
In the case of real estate, prior to the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, it was thought by many investors that it was impossible for the price of american real estate to decline. No one could remember an instance where US real estate exhibited noteworthy downtrends. Which led to the urban myth of real estate only being able to appreciate in value. As a result, the ensuing crash of 2008 caught many completely by surprise.
There are many who claim that reverting to a gold standard would prevent inflation. However, we know that the roman empire experienced considerable inflation due to its denarius being devalued close to 2,000 years ago.
While there are generally assets which are more reliable and stable than others. I don't know if its accurate to say that anything has proven to be exempt from bubbles, devaluation or crashes. Everything has its time. And when that day comes, who knows.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
