If it's TCP then there's an uplink implied.

It's a way to fraudulently pump the price (or lower the price) of a security. One person with two accounts can keep trading back and forth with themselves, and since crypto exchange know-your-customer measures are trivial or nonexistent, it's very easy to get away with.

There is still an order book so to get the price to rise or fall, the trader would have to buy or sell enough to clear the book.

How does trading back and forth with themselves do anything other than generate fees for the exchange?

Does this apply to NFTs though, where you're usually talking about a unique NFT within a collection of a few thousand? If you hold a unique NFT and trade it to yourself for a crazy amount of money just once, then that's what everyone is going to see as the last sale price of that NFT. They're not trading often anyway usually, people would probably be more suspicious if you had hundreds of trades.

Edit: I was mixing this up with another conversation, the parent comment obviously isn't about NFTs. I'll leave this here though because I think wash trading is even more relevant to them.

The book is tiny and the exchange is probably the one doing the wash trading.

Why wouldn't the exchange just lie and say that volume is higher than it actually is?

The more money you have, the lower the fees. No fees for being a Maker.

You can actually pay nothing on FTX. Only a .025 taker fee + 60% discount for holding FTX coin plus a .01 rebate for being a market maker.

Most of wash trading is probably done by connected individuals though. Whole point of being unregulated. Just be friends with CZ or SBF.

Well, the book can be tiny sometimes.

It makes bo sense when it comes to any popular cryptocurrency. The only way book can be small for these is on small exchange. But if you attempt to manipylate it to bring in away from current price on large exchanges you'll be immediately interfered with by people doing interexchange arbitrage. Also manipulating small exchange has small impact.

also fees can be nonexistent for big customers, which are likely to engage in such things

It is a huge premium. In reality it should only be the future value of the current spot, given the current interest rate. For other types of futures (oil, grains) that have storage costs or seasonality there are other factors that affect the difference between the spot and future price, but for financial futures (especially cash-settled) it should be nearly no difference for a one-month expiry.

Most people think it's a bubble, and nobody thinks they're the greater fool.

It's tidally locked, so you couldn't you put the settlement on the Earth-facing side and not have to worry as much about meteors?

Well, it's like holding a shield of a radius of only 6,371 km with an arm of 384,400 km long.

Or to put it in human terms, like holding a shield of 1.25 cm of radius with your arm of 75 cm.

It will not protect you really very much.

That seems to make sense, but if you look at the moon from Earth, you see an awful lot of craters...

I was thinking the same thing. Earth will shield the moon on the Earth-side, mostly.

Don't cryptocurrency transactions take a lot more time & energy than, say, a credit card transaction?

Depends on the cryptocurrency in question, but yes, a cryptocurrency working under a Proof-of-Work scheme like bitcoin, will use more energy than credit card systems. I'm not sure it'll ever be possible to outperform centralized, digital systems on an energy usage level. What I was critical of, was the comparison to physical money. Energy usage isn't really that important a metric for payment systems though, price is probably more relevant, where some innovations in cryptocurrency might come to be competitive with credit cards.

Yes, but it sounds cooler!

Or you can thank the English for figuring out how to measure longitude.

Well yes :)

Greenwich is actually not a bad ___location to place the 0 meridian since it makes the international date line run through the least populated region of the world.

I use VsVim in Visual Studio, highly recommended.

I guess C++/CLI doesn't count as a .NET language? Shame it gets so little attention, it's a fantastic interop language.