Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 277 posts

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#151

Post by celticninja »

root_axis wrote: post #39
RexetBlell wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Ethereum Classic exists proves that Buterin has no control.

No it doesn't. ETC is worth something like 2% of the value of ETH, it's a joke in comparison. Besides, the existence of "Ethereum Classic" is not something special, it's the inevitable side effect of suddenly having the balance of your ETH wallet "cloned" in a fork, you only have to lose if you don't treat both wallets like they're real.

The existence of ETC says to me that ETH has the same problem, that is a bunch of power users can change the rules if they want to (if it is financially beneficial for them to do so). No different to a fiat currency controlled by the government.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#152

Post by waterhouse »

Nursie wrote: post #137
pjc50 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook-bucks Missed opportunity to call them "Marks", although maybe only German speakers will get the joke.

I'd have just gone straight for "Facebucks"!

One could shorten it even further and create a valid context for saying "I have no fucks to give" and similar.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#153

Post by celticninja »

ForHackernews wrote: post #91
camjohnson26 wrote: post #14

If Facebook can pull this off they will have brought about the first universal internet currency, which would be a stunning achievement and could revolutionalize the web as we know it. Failed projects give us some idea of what their challenges will be. Cryptocurrencies right now have a trade off between scalability and decentralization. Bitcoin is theoretically decentralized even though the reality is more complex. B…

> Facebook’s currency will probably use this method...the holders of the currency vote for what happens on the network What are you basing this assumption on? From everything Facebook has ever done to date, I expect Zuckcoin will use the method of "what FB says goes, and if you don't like it, you can pound sand."

Which really boils down to 'what Zuckerberg says goes" so you want to put the control of a currency, perhaps used by 1bn real users, in the hands of a single greedy individual who has already shown contempt for users and their data.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#154

Post by narrator »

divbyzer0 wrote: post #117
superkuh wrote: post #17

Is it really a cryptocurrency when it's completely centralized? No. This is just Facebook-bucks. Store dollars. It's has absolutely none of the benefits of a real cryptocurrency.

This smells of identity verification. They offer a payment mechanism which needs to be legally compliant. Bingo! Social credit system with verified ID. The crypto part is just to make sound hip.

When you get banned from Facebook for talking about whatever you can't buy or sell on the Internet anymore because you don't carry "the Mark". They are a private company so they can deal with whomever they want. You can still use cash. These tech companies want it so that if they ban you they can really screw up your life. Just look at people who have their whole Google existence wiped out because of some random policy violation.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#155

Post by xtracto »

tuesdayrain wrote: post #146
superkuh wrote: post #17

Is it really a cryptocurrency when it's completely centralized? No. This is just Facebook-bucks. Store dollars. It's has absolutely none of the benefits of a real cryptocurrency.

If it's a currency and is implemented using cryptographic concepts, I feel comfortable calling it a cryptocurrency. "Decentralization" is a spectrum and a highly subjective one, so I don't think it should be a requirement.

Indeed nowadays a lot of people relate the word 'crypto' with Blockchain related concepts, but being crypto only entails using some cryptographic concepts.

Cryptocommunication might be nothing but HTTPS/TLS. Cryptocurrency could very well be something similar, without involving Blockchain technology.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#156

Post by xtracto »

root_axis wrote: post #39
RexetBlell wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Ethereum Classic exists proves that Buterin has no control.

No it doesn't. ETC is worth something like 2% of the value of ETH, it's a joke in comparison. Besides, the existence of "Ethereum Classic" is not something special, it's the inevitable side effect of suddenly having the balance of your ETH wallet "cloned" in a fork, you only have to lose if you don't treat both wallets like they're real.

But if the market did not like the new direction, it was super easy to move to ETC.

Just like with the OpenOffice, LibreOffice fork. Everyone was free to use one or the other. The community chose.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#157

Post by narrator »

colechristensen wrote: post #108
runeks wrote: post #102

> It has been a decade since bitcoin was born, yet consumers hardly use it—or the hundreds of other cryptocurrencies—to pay for things. And why would they? Adding two extra steps to paying someone -- the buyer converting local currency to bitcoin, and then the seller converting bitcoin to local currency -- can never compete with just transferring local currency directly. Cryptocurrency was meant to be much more than…

You probably can't have a stable global cryptocurrency without a central bank. Bitcoin fundamentally cannot work for credit because the risk to the lender is ridiculous. Macroeconomics doesn't work in diverse economies if you can't partition off areas of the globe and create friction at the borders for trade (with monetary policy). The same products and services need to have location based costs to ensure local econo…

"Bitcoin fundamentally cannot work for credit because the risk to the lender is ridiculous."

Kind of like this startup founder who wanted to buy property with a SAFE. I told him get a bank loan. He said: "That's risky!"

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#158

Post by randomsearch »

My speculative take:

Facebook’s main product has likely peaked, in terms of users and advertising unit economics. The brand is tarnished, it’s not cool for younger people, its value proposition has been heavily eroded by short sighted decisions.

Instagram is doing really well, but by its nature is no substitute for Facebook. It’s too specialised, too narrow a demographic, and doesn’t have the same appeal all round. It can’t pick up the slack from a declining Facebook.

There are real regulatory dangers that Instagram etc will be separated off anyhows.

This is a bet on something that could be big. I’d bet against it working out, but a series of bets like this are probably the best strategy to hedge against decline. We know payments dovetails well with messaging apps (hence perhaps the attempt to unify them, conveniently making it more difficult to break up the company). Payments is a no brainer, the “crypto” spin original but probably irrelevant. For Facebook it does have the advantage of enabling them to accumulate a large fund of “deposits” they can invest.

If the above is right, we should see a few other big bets being placed soon.

Re: Facebook’s New Cryptocurrency Gets Big Backers

#160

Post by new2628 »

majewsky wrote: post #143
tin7in wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hyperinflation is too long ago to remember. Germans use cash much more than the average Western European. The memory of hyperinflation and bank system collapse is one of the explanations why people prefer to store value in currency (often foreign currency) and not trust so much a bank or card issuer.

Also, in West Germany, the Deutsche Mark (1948-2002) is strongly associated with the post-war economic boom. It's still a common rhetoric among conservative populists to argue for a return to the good old times ^W Mark.

I don't think it is just a "common rhetoric", but rather a common mainstream truth that the change from the Mark to the Euro (which can be kept weaker) allows German companies to export cheaply while making people's salaries and savings worth less.
Post reply on HN