What is the general thinking on what the right properties of cryptocurrencies should be to give them nonzero value? (e.g., cheap, low volatility, low transaction cost (in time and expense to transacting party), reliability of transactions, lack of central authority?)
Bitcoin and many other cryptocurrencies are fiat currencies, nothing more. Bitcoin's value is dependent not on underlying fundamentals, but rather on supply and demand. Its supply is limited and will be fixed, but its demand is based on on its perceived usefulness, either for storing value or making purchases (maybe other things?). Until we see that it is useful for these things, we should assume its fundamental value is zero.
you're describing currencies, not fiat currencies. Even gold has limited 'intrinsic' value. Pretty much all of it 'real' applications have acceptable, cheaper substitutes. Anyone buying gold-plated connectors for their audio equipment is basically an idiot (source: in high school I used to work for radio shack)
There are many reasons gold has become a valuable currency: it has a distinctive density, a distinctive color, it doesn't oxidize easily, it's not radioactive or toxic, and it's relatively rare (compared to, for example, iron). Its scarcity and distinctiveness, together with its aesthetic appeal, have made it a natural choice as a currency. See, for example, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25255957.
Bitcoin has none of these properties ,which makes me call it a fiat currency (like the U.S. dollar). The only difference is that the U.S. dollar does have transactional value (and limited storage value).
The distinctive color and density are intrinsic properties of gold that relate to its viability as a currency because it makes gold verifiable. In that sense, Bitcoin has intrinsic value due to its verifiability as well.
At the end of an article is an anecdote about an older (for Silicon Valley) woman who states "And maybe I’m going to lose [my investment of $12k].. Maybe I’m going to keep cleaning houses. But something is telling me I can trust this generation."
My worry is that (1) people like this woman who don't understand markets, let alone cryptocurrencies, will get burned by this, and (2) some small set of people who do understand markets will take advantage of those who don't.
This could result in a situation in which techies are blamed, like Wall Street, for causing lots of people to lose money (and -- let's face it -- lots of people will lose money, if not now then at some point).
When my 70 year old neighbor who can barely operate an iPhone wants to buy crypto, all I can think of is that scene in the Wolf of Wall Street where they're selling people penny stocks. I do think there is a utility for crypto and I do think some cryptocurrencies will be good investments long term. But I also think the hype is outpacing the utility and a lot of people will be left holding the bag
I'll admit that I went to the page skeptical, expecting another "let's see how some arbitrary mathematical function turned into a song sounds," but I was pleasantly surprised that some of these sound decent.
It makes me wonder: what if we take existing songs, try to find space-filling curves that explain them, and then look for different paths through those curves? In other words: would it be easy / possible to parameterize existing songs as curves, so that we can find which subset of the space of space-filling curves is actually interesting to human ears?
This is great. However, I didn't see anything about whether it is a civil violation and assume you could still be sued by a third party (you just couldn't be thrown in not jail over it). Please correct me if I am mistaken.
