Nick Szabo  🔑

Spot on. 1. Because something is available, it doesn’t mean that one should invest in it. 2. Using products/services of an investment (real skin in the game & practical understanding) is essential. 3. Some legacy entities are “better” security holes than some crypto exchanges. :)

Ps.: If using Bitcoin and one is technically and operationally sophisticated enough, there is no reason no to hold one’s own keys.

Example?

An example would be a sample technology savy engineer or a bank employee who understands BTC wallets and operational security around securing a bearer asset well-enough to store his own coins, but leaves his coins on a crypto exchange for convenience.

In that case they understand the techniques but not the value proposition. If they don't find the main value-add use case actually valuable why would they think it's a good investment? They are probably just confused, or think they are a good technical investor (gambler).

Correct. Many investors don’t understand Bitcoin’s main value proposition well enough, but find other/additional values attractive such as low correlation to traditional asset classes(portfolio diversification), relatively easy access to the asset, transferability, new tech, etc.

I found that there is a group of investors (mostly also gold bugs) who understand Bitcoin’s value proposition, but are afraid to engage before the legal environment around digital assets solidify. Some of this group is also afraid of technology risk at this time.

This reflects a profound lack of understanding about legal risks and how to reduce them.

You don’t have to like Starbucks coffee to understand that other people are buying it

If you don't understand *why* they are buying it -- which requires sharing their experiences -- then you are ceterus paribus a below-average coffee stock investor

I hate Starbucks coffee though I understand that argument. My best crypto investments last year were on things I don't like too...

So you got lucky gambling, congratulations.

I think that you didn't understood my tweet... (or I wasn't clear, don't know...) The fact that I don't like something doesn't mean that I don't understand that (and why) other people like it.

It makes it quite a bit less likely, especially with something so widely misunderstood as money.

There was too much dogma in that take, Szabo. I don't like Schultz' politics or coffee but if the fundamentals are good I'm going to buy stock.

How would you understand their fundamentals if you have not compared their coffee and so don't know their basic value prop(s) vs. their competition?

CANSLIM method precludes my subjective opinion of the company's product. Earnings per share New products or services Debt to equity Sector relative performance Broader market trend I can't stand Craig Wright but I'd almost consider buying BCHSV if the setup was right.

The purpose of using the exchange is to trade only.

In other words, mere technical gambling without actually understanding the investment.

What's the point in automatically assuming that just because someone buys their Bitcoins on an exchange that they don't understand what they are buying? Respectfully, Rams

I didn't automatically assume it, just observing that it's much more likely than not.