Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, there’s obvious benefits for FB. What are the benefits for users? Are people actually going to want to use this?
For users, the advantage would be an easy to use stable-coin, that is more accessible to the average person. Right now, most crypto currency has plenty of complexity to it. FacebookCoin will probably work more similarly to CashApp vs. Bitcoin. It means most people using it won't even realize it's a Blockchain token. It'll be like "Facebook Bucks". But then it also offers the flexibility of a blockchain token to more…
Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
201–210 of 345 posts
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#202And here I thought that the zuccoins in the last FacebookCTF was an obvious joke.
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#203A few points: - some pegged currencies are still decentralised (e.g. MakerDAO) - they rely solely on smart contracts - even with a centralised peg, you have to trust an organisation to keep the collateral, but the contract can state that anyone can move the funds around, so the managing organisation cannot just remove funds at will Also, compared to a centralised database, you have an interoperability aspect - if it'…
MakerDAO is not decentralised, simply because the ETH/USD price feed isn't decentralised. If the servers providing the feed get hacked, say goodbye to your ETH collateral.
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#204Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Do you think it's as easy for those in India, China, or Kenya, for instance? Actually yes. Take a look at xoom.com and it's competitors for example (flat rate money transfers at a fraction of swift fees). Only issue is getting money out of those countries. But that is a political and national issue.
And how about Venezuela? Or for people without a bank account?
> Or for people without a bank account?
I'm having strong doubts that you actually understand how the world banks. There are hundreds of millions of people who don't have bank accounts, and use electronic payments through their cell providers.
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#206The most logical thing for Facebook would be to create something similar to the Chinese payment systems Alipay and WeChat Pay, bound directly to your Facebook account and maybe even issuing credit to some accounts. Completely different from a pseudonymous cash-like cryptocurrency like Bitcoin or Tether.
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#207Can anyone explain what the point of a pegged cryptocurrency is? Since you are dependent on the issuing entity to honour the stated peg, why not just have your balance be an entry in a regular database maintained by that entity? What exactly does the blockchain gain you here? One thing it does _not_ get you is censorship resistance. If the central authority wants to take away coins from a wallet, all it needs to do i…
>Can anyone explain what the point of a pegged cryptocurrency is? What was the point of arcades taking your quarters and issuing you tokens for the machines? Why not just allow the machines to take your quarters? The idea is for the issuer to take real money from you and issue you Monopoly money which the issuer can track and control. In a worst case scenario the issuer can make up new rules (change their terms and c…
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#208Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#209I 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.
A payments system on Facebook makes a ton of sense and would be very useful. I just don't get why it has to be cryptocurrency.
Re: Facebook plans cryptocurrency debut
#210Facebook's blockchain will most likely be a consortium of corporate validators. In this case you could say that the blockchain is "just" a normal distributed append-only hash-linked ledger with public verifiable records, but nowadays the more concise term for that is "blockchain."
Your definition is missing the "block" from blockchain and it's also missing a concensus protocol.