Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think there is a compromise between nerfing the whole world and herding everyone like cattle, and allowing people who aren't well equipped lose more than they can afford in speculative gambling. As I mentioned before, I don't think I have this compromise worked out, and I don't know what the answer is, but it feels wrong to leave things at "Caveat emptor".

One idea might be some kind of test. Can you pass a basic financial literacy test? If so, then maybe you should be allowed to gamble even on high risk things. If not, maybe finance isn't for you right now. When you pass the test you get a license and need to provide that license when doing KYC checks with financial institutions.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the question of whether all people have sufficient mental equipment to handle risky financial decisions.

I do think the concept of money is valuable. To put it in my earlier framework, I think the people who are consuming the value are the people who use money to exchange it for goods or services.

I don't think dogecoin innovates on money though. In many ways, I think dogecoin is a step back from money. For example, our current systems have vastly greater throughput.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: