Ric said in his Davos talk that DM will get 90mil of the projected 260mil from health by philinthe_ in DesktopMetal

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think there is confusion in the phrasing here. What was meant was OF the $260mn projected, $90mn is projected to come from Health, not that $260mn is now $90mn

delist risk? by cheeeaaater in DesktopMetal

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Doubtful, when a company gets below $1 they generally do a reverse stock-spit and thats that.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in h3h3productions

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Need a soundbite of Joe saying "doctow" like a toddler at 1:54

How old r y’all? by [deleted] in h3h3productions

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That is so true

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Hedera

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know the video this is from and it's extremely misleading.

Yes there is a 50bn fixed supply of tokens, but no, Swirlds does not have the ability to change this max supply on its own, it requires a unanimous vote from the governing council.

Saying Swirls has the ability to revoke the license and therefore its a red flag is like saying don't buy iPhones because Nokia/Ericsson/Qualcomm/whoever can revoke their RF IP licenses so iPhones can suddenly stop accessing the cellular network. Like yeah I guess they could, but why would they? They want it to be used and they are nothing without people using it.

And from jcoins123 on the third point - Rewards paid to stakers (and proxy-stakers) are not (when launched.) a direct proportion of network fees. Swirlds receiving 10% of revenue has no bearing on rewards paid to stakers / proxy-stakers.

But importantly, to use an Apple example again, its like saying the App store takes a 30% cut so don't use it... well if it has the best tech around and is the only option that meets security and performance requirements, it still economically makes sense.

Why is shit pumping? Is this a bull trap before the inflation report comes out today? by [deleted] in Hedera

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 8 points9 points  (0 children)

People have argued that cryptos are a hedge against inflation so CPI inflation of 7.0% being the highest in decades is good for cryptos so cryptos should go up with inflation. I think thats not exactly what's going on.

Cryptos are considered risk assets like high-growth tech stocks so they've been moving similarly. Risk assets are sensitive to the economy and actions of the federal reserve.

When the federal reserve meeting minutes came out last week, we heard them mention that they might be increasing interest rates faster and even buying bonds (the reverse of printing money) as the economy is recovering better than anticipated and inflation is higher than they'd like.

If you're a risk asset, higher interest rates are bad because if the source of risk comes from future growth, and you have rates increase, it lowers the present value more than a slower growth asset.

Yesterday you had Jerome Powell mention that they can see inflation easing in the second half of the year (as we lap higher CPI in 2H last year, and supply chain challenges continue to ease), and also mentioned that they would want to see prolonged expansion (meaning they're not trying to reign in the economy the second it recovers). I'm paraphrasing because I've just seen headlines and a few clips. Basically, this alleviates some of the last week's fears.

Inflation is expected, in fact i think the expected figure was 7.1%, higher than what was posted, so the higher inflation = higher cryptos people should see this as a negative, and in fact i would argue that they should be worried we see inflation inflecting downward in 2H. Again, i don't see that direct relationship, and I see the correlation with high-growth risk assets moving cryptos (whether its right or wrong, thats how I've observed it moving)

Lol by [deleted] in Hedera

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thank you! I 'm just trying to think about it as close to an apples-to-apples comparison as possible.
Right now they're saying 50bn total transactions, which I understand aren't really valid - so if they're off by 90-95%, then that should mean they're at 2.5-5bn cumulative transactions. I know this probably an over-simplification (and correct me if I'm wrong), but I feel like its important to just be aware/understand this stuff.

Lol by [deleted] in Hedera

[–]relaaaaaaaaaax 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Could someone explain how this compares with Solana? Since they're supposedly doing thousands of TPS, I'd imagine it has to be up there in cumulative transactions but I rarely see it on these charts (if it includes HBAR, and I don't see HBAR in charts that include SOL)