Crypto's no different from any other financial asset. Value depends on how it's used, not what it is.
Every major asset manager has made plans to incorporate digital assets. You're speaking from a limited perspective. Of course we all are, but my point is that you can't look at this as a passing thing.
can you show the data that supports that claim?
I can't. It's confidential. I work in the industry, so you'll have to take my word for it.
Maybe, but if you could profit from it than who really cares what it is?
Oh I've no doubt that crypto is or going to be part of an asset mix of many a fund. That is not in dispute. For me it's the utility of blockchain, smart contracts, DAOs, etc. - all which seem to be, on the surface, wonderful things - but all appear to crumble as soon as one removes the speculative aspect of it. DAOs in particular sound wonderful, but as soon as we get into the workings of things we start seeing cracks - for example ennforcing the constitution against actors that are nihilistc who are willing to destroy their own value for the purpose to destroy the DAO as a whole (just one example). Again - I understand very little of it... and I am certain that there are tech solutions to many of these objections... but the more complicated the system gets the lest trust there is. Heck - if we can't trust CDC as a society, how can we trust some obscure and convoluted crypto algorithm.
Right. Like capitalism. Don't buy into it and it will go away.
Yeah, I can't comment on the overall stability. I know a lot of contextual things about the asset class which are promising and others scary, but not enough to give advice.
Robbing banks can be profitable too.
But this is legal and harms no one, so there's a tiny difference
It harms those who failed to cash out in time when the whole thing collapses.
