121–130 of 132 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If facebook controls minting the coins but can't control transactions using the coins
if only facebook can mine, then they choose do whatever they want, the blockchain just becomes a weird centralized database
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://github.com/facebook/buck You’re welcome.
A build tool is not in the same category as a revenue generating product.
Because Telegram's TON was a huge success, yeah,
- $1.7B raised in ICO: This is far more than has ever been raised in any other ICO. I also think it says something about investor optimism. I'd bet that this was a data point in Facebook's decision to do something similar with WhatsApp.
- Telegram's development team: Some of the best in the world. They've done a lot with a few highly talented programmers and mathematicians.
- 200,000,000+ monthly active users as of March 2018.
Knew this would happen one day. Big tech has 0 reason to use third party coins when they do literally everything in house. FacebookCoin, AmazonCoin, etc., will work 100x better too—not just technologically but also in interopability with current banking infrastructure and government regulators. Decentralization is objectively worse for user experience all around. If a centralized trusted authority like the FED or a F…
Doesn't your argument apply to regular money as well, i.e. "Zero reason for anyone to use Bitcoin/Ethereum/Monero when regular money exists. (Unless they want to commit crimes—and yes, that’s how it would be perceived.)"
This article probably isn't true, but something like it is going to happen someday.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
because you still want the currency to have value if facebook closes one day, or stop supporting the idea. Facebook would endorse the currency, but the currency ecosystem would have a life of its own. At least that’s my guess..
Why would Facebook have any interest in this? Public trust? Is the public that smart?
Cryptocurrency mentioned. Blockchain mentioned. I really should've bought a card for this buzzword bingo. Is this just PR or are they genuinely so clueless? If the former I wonder if they missed the shift this year where cryptocoins stopped being the coolest kid in the town anymore. If a centralized company wants to roll out electronic payments through its services it can just, you know, do that. They don't need bloc…
Heard of the hype cycle? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle They're not as clueless as you are about cryptocurrencies. It's not going to be centralized.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could be about the legality of aetting a bank in every country and figuring out rate exchange
Why would it be more legal / legally easier to set up a service in Peru that turns WhatsDubloons into soles and vice versa, affiliated with a multinational company that converts WhatsDubloons into USD, than an entity that directly transfers soles and USD?
Because Telegram's TON was a huge success, yeah,
I can't tell if this is sarcasm (and you know something I don't), or you're being serious. I would agree if you're being serious, despite the lack of news coverage, based on a few points: - $1.7B raised in ICO: This is far more than has ever been raised in any other ICO. I also think it says something about investor optimism. I'd bet that this was a data point in Facebook's decision to do something similar with Whats…
> development team: Some of the best in the world
Well, messaging isn't exactly rocket science.
And they did a lot right (open source clients, bots, channels, proxies). But their secret chat implementation is weird (literally every crypto expert has the same question: "why did you pick these extremely unpopular barely known primitives to reinvent your wheel?")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trust in it to do/be what?
Trust in it to maintain its value if it is a stable coin. Alternatively, trust it not to be hacked or inflated if it isn’t. (As well as trust it to maintain whatever monetary properties they advertise to give it value as money.