Live data from Hacker News

Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

techcrunch.com

181–190 of 345 posts

Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that doesn't really answer the question being asked. If the cryptocurrency is completely controlled by a centralized authority who has absolute rights over the system, why bother with the technical and cognitive hurdles of using a blockchain? A standard ledger in a centralized database is more than adequate for that task, and much easier to maintain.

The main gain is in acting as a trusted clearing system. Clearing takes less time than FedWire or ACH. Settlement, on the other hand, still has to go through the Federal Reserve.

But using a database as a ledger would clear faster than even the fastest blockchain, wouldn’t it? Or am I misunderstanding what you mean by “clearing”. I’m assuming you mean how long it takes for person A to get money to person B.

Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

#184

I’m not sure how anyone has even the slightest trust in Facebook anymore. Why is it that people still use the service? Is convenience really that powerful?

I have exactly zero trust in Facebook but I have had so many irritating moments and missed opportunities due to ditching my account years ago that I am seriously considering reopening it again.

The main aspect I'm considering these days is that I'm not important in the grand scheme of things so there's no rational reason to increase difficulty in things that do really matter such as having memorable experiences while I can in exchange for privacy or to make some statement. In a sense, I will have privacy anyway out of just being a data point out of billions.

It's not that Facebook is convenient but rather that not having it can be inconvenient depending on your context.

Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

#186
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same reason why cryptocurrencies haven’t seen general adoption: none of that has any inherent value to someone who isn’t already a convert. Things which would matter are “can transfer real money to a friend with less markup than Apple/Google/PayPal”, “can sell things online at better terms than PayPal”, “can make transactions at a low enough rate that a business model requiring micro-payments is viable”,…

I agree, but [more general] cryptocurrencies do already check a few boxes: - is cash you can email - prevents hostile monetary policy from stealing your wealth (inflation, negative interest rates, haircuts, etc) - keeps working when you travel (unlike Paypal / credit cards which often get frozen) - uncensorable transactions that ignore borders - can send large $ amounts anywhere for ridiculously cheap - more vertigo…

“cash you can email” may be a cool-sounding bumper-sticker but it's not how I'd describe something which requires operating a complex multi-party system. Similarly, “large amounts for ridiculously cheap” has historically not been true and given how much highly-visible and easily blocked infrastructure a blockchain requires to be online in order to operate, “uncensorable” is more of a hypothetical aspirational goal than a given (an envelope of USD is much safer).

“hostile monetary policy” is especially dubious in this context where it's supposedly pinned to the USD but even in other cases it's a hard sell for most people: do you a) put your money into a bank account, investment, or other asset you expect to do better than inflation or b) put everything into a complex system with no guarantees that it'll be operating in 5 years, fraud protection, etc. and hope that the conversion fees you pay on both sides will be lower than the difference?

“keeps working when you travel” could potentially be an area where it could match the credit card system except that it either means that you're traveling with a ton of cash and no recourse if someone steals it or, if like most people you use a managed service somewhere else, hoping that you don't trip the same kind of security measures which banks use for the same reasons. Given that most people do not travel that frequently and most travelers do not have significant issues using credit cards while abroad, it's unclear to me that this will be enough of a compelling advantage.

Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As many mobile app games have shown, you don't need a cryptocurrency to achieve this, just some arbitrary point system. I think GP was asking, "Why Cryptocurrency?" since the benefits of blockchain don't really translate to this system.

It allows for a tiered system. Average users will use the token entirely within the Facebook ecosystem. Advanced users will have the ability to withdraw their tokens from Facebook's system and utilize them on other platforms. Look at Paypal USD Balance. It's really just a "token" issued by PayPal, an IOU where 1 PaypalUSD = 1 USD Debt from Paypal. But PayPalUSD can only be used within Paypal.com. The only way to brin…

An IOU isn't automatically a token though. For the token analogy above, there is no reason for the arcade to start using blockchain instead of little metal tokens (even if there is some marginal benefit of the new tokens being usable at any location, and that the metal tokens no longer need to be produced). We could trade arcade tokens wherever we wanted, but we don't because there is no expectation of value received for the token holder. If Facebook doesn't open some ecosystem for their coin soon, the whole measure seems to be nothing but a database (as parent commenters have noted).

Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

#188

I will revisit this thread in 2021 just to see how wrong everyone was. FB has billions of users that interact with its product everyday. People who make plans, attend events, split all sort of bills. A borderless stablecoin will be a gamechanger. It can fuel commerce but above that it will kill many middlemen and rightly so.

Wouldn’t Facebook just become the middleman instead of visa or whoever?

Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut

#190
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same reason why cryptocurrencies haven’t seen general adoption: none of that has any inherent value to someone who isn’t already a convert. Things which would matter are “can transfer real money to a friend with less markup than Apple/Google/PayPal”, “can sell things online at better terms than PayPal”, “can make transactions at a low enough rate that a business model requiring micro-payments is viable”,…

I agree, but [more general] cryptocurrencies do already check a few boxes: - is cash you can email - prevents hostile monetary policy from stealing your wealth (inflation, negative interest rates, haircuts, etc) - keeps working when you travel (unlike Paypal / credit cards which often get frozen) - uncensorable transactions that ignore borders - can send large $ amounts anywhere for ridiculously cheap - more vertigo…

"prevents hostile monetary policy" -- except this isn't true. Crypto has just taken monetary policy decisions out of the hands of the electorate, however tenuous a chain of authority that is (voters -> president -> Fed chair), and placed it in the hands of either "the original developers" or "whoever has 51% of network computation".

That is an absolutely horrible trade-off for anyone who wants a democratically run currency.

That and the irreversibility in cases of fraud make crypto a complete non-starter for me. I want to be able to reverse transactions if someone starts siphoning off my coin; and I want to be able to use the force of law to do so, if I win a lawsuit or even just don't want thieves to steal my money.

What is the crypto answer to "someone stole your private key and is stealing your money"?

Post reply on HN