I really wish they succeed. It takes 3 to 5 business days to transfer money using ACH in the US if you don't want to shell out 25$ for wire transfer. Transferring money is just about transferring a few bytes of data. Why does it take 3 business days? Why are customers still forced to shell out 25$ for instant transfers?
You appear to have a fundamental misunderstanding of ACH vs wire. They aren't the same thing, with one of them having a fee just for the speed of it. 3-5 days is actually a feature of ACH. This delay includes the ability to reverse a transaction, a built-in risk management. For example, here is a quote from an article on the front page of HN right now (#5, SIM swap horror story): > After a couple of days, our bank re…
Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
181–190 of 262 posts
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#182If it is pegged to USD, there is no investment potential. It is just as bad as cash. The idea behind bitcoin is that you don't need to rely on the US government for storing value. There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. That article did not address this at all. This is the most compelling reason to buy bitcoin.
I don't want to invest in money. I want to exchange my money for goods and / or services. It seems that bitcoin is great for the former and not so great at the latter :P
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#183Any stable coins are just payment network without a license.
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#184I can grasp the idea that Facebook would want to capture more payments like WeChat does; what I can't figure is how having their own cryptocurrency would add anything. Whom does it appeal to? I doubt Facebook wants the drug dealer/money launderer market segment for example. (I also doubt it'll be secure or anonymous enough to satisfy those people.) And it's no good for speculators, if it's pegged. Seems like at best…
They're using cryptocurrency because - off the top of my head in no particular order: 1. Hype 2. It gives "credibility" to their currency 3. they can be regulated as a crypto-currency that way. 4. It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. 5. It locks the users in to their partners because it's more friction to get money. 6. Easier to obtain the data on how users spe…
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#185The reason for Bitcoin’s design is precisely because a centralized/pegged alternative was tried and failed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecash Facebook’s currency is not a successor of Bitcoin, it’s an inferior reincarnation of a failed predecessor.
The Libra whitepaper is supposed to debut this month, so I guess we'll see to what extent it's a true cryptocurrency. I wish Libra was building on an Ethereum scaling technology, like Plasma, but most likely it's a new standalone proof-of-authority blockchain where the validators are the hundred companies investing $10M each. In terms of the sliding scale between centralized and decentralized, Ethereum v1 and Bitcoin…
In Bitcoin, as long as you pay the fee, some miner will probably mine your transaction, based on purely economic incentive. Miners that refuse to serve certain customers based on "tainted" coins or illegal activity simply forego that revenue to miners who don't.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and conjecture that Facebook at the 100 entrenched industry players who are part of this new system will probably not consider censorship-resistance as a high-priority goal for the system. They will probably have a law-enforcement login portal that calls up Facebook's data profile of participants in a suspect transaction. There will probably be blacklists and fund freezes. There will probably be State Department liaisons to help comply with sanctions.
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, Facebook has a pretty poor history with regard to security, so I'm not so sure either way.
Do they ?
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#187Many of us live in places where we can rely on our regional currencies to remain stable. Maybe the pound will flounder under Brexit, the Euro under the debt crisis or the dollar under whatever the trade war is supposed to be doing, but there's little or no public will to divest from national currencies, and the main reason anyone would dip into cryptocurrencies is speculation. Also we're hackers and distrust Facebook. Fine - we're not the target demographic.
I think the general population of Argentina, India, Venezuela, etc etc, _are_ the target demographic. The idea would be to make savings, payments, and digital purchases for people in developing or unstable economies reliable, inflation resistant, and low-fee - particularly vs forex. As a bonus for us hackers, I'm sure every Orwellian data scraping fever dream you can imagine is rolled in too - but most people aren't hackers, so whether this is a showstopper remains to be seen.
I'm not just spitballing here - Facebook claim this to be so.[2] Thiel and Altman's Reserve Currency works basically the same way, with the same ambitions[3]. The implications are _much_ bigger than Johnny-come-latelies from Menlo Park stumbling into the blockchain hype - which seems to be the prevailing take here. What we're seeing is tech giants betting big on having total ownership over banking and purchases in much of the world's population.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-argentina-economy-oecd/ar...
[2] https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/6/18655366/facebook-cryptocu...
[3] https://reserve.org/about. Pedantic technical note: Reserve is moving in a three phase sequence from USD collateralization (like Tether / Coinbase's token) to algorithmic stabilization against a basket of goods (not currencies), whereas Facebook is skipping to phase three and using a basket of currencies as the peg. (It's an open question how this will be accomplished, since Libra's whitepaper won't be released until tomorrow.)
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It enables faster transactions and reactions to the transaction states than regular currency. This is only true in the US, where the inter-bank financial system runs on mainframes and 40 year old code. The British banking system decided a while ago that they were going to update their bank communication system, and now they can send sums between bank accounts at different banks within 10 seconds.
10 seconds is still an two orders of magnitude too slow given many use cases and the technology which is currently available. I should be able to tap my card on a subway turnstile and have it open immediately such that the subway faces zero fraud risk. A centralized system should be limited only by RTT and there are ways to overcome even that via caching layers or cryptographic techniques. You want something sub 250m…
Re: Facebook’s Libra cryptocurrency: Privacy and stability concerns
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are 21,000,000 BTC ever ever, you can't print more. This is not true. Forks exist, and anyone can make 21 million bitcoin at a time. It’s still a question of if people will accept the forks, but it is an option
If it's a fork then it's not BTC