Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin is a disaster

metzdowd.com

391–400 of 992 posts

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#391

I agree with most of the points raised by the author but as a Venezuelan Bitcoin is a godsend. If you live abroad and want to send remittances to your friends and family it can be pretty easy in a normal country , with wire transfers,western union and so on. If your family lives in Venezuela your options are extremely more limited. These are some of the options Venezuelans have had to use: 1. Ask the money to be sent…

The only reason BTC works in this scenario is that the authorities are not chasing it down. If they decide to, it will be just as unviable as the other options and authorities have many methods at their disposal to make bitcoin transfers difficult.

BTC is cool, but no amount of tech can solve what is essentially a policy issue: overseas remittances.

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#392
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theoretically companies like Mindgeek who have been kicked off of the VISA/Mastercard duopoly, would be able to use Bitcoin as a censorship-resistant way to accept online payment. There's additional benefits as mentioned earlier like not needing to comply with KYC laws. Of course, as Bitcoin currently stands, it's difficult for this to come to fruition because most holders are speculators rather than people intereste…

> There's additional benefits as mentioned earlier like not needing to comply with KYC laws. In many situations lack of KYC is a bug, not a feature.

>In many situations lack of KYC is a bug, not a feature.

Some people seem to be actually believe that.

You just happen to be one of them.

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That you brought up banking is precisely my point. Imagine if you needed a bank account to give someone $100 cash. Or to spend a few bucks at a street hotdog vendor. Most people take it for granted that they need a bank to do anything, and they don't really consider how powerless they are over their own money. Like how it's illegal to carry too much cash (and it can simply be taken away). And how your bank can impose…

> Like how it's illegal to carry too much cash Which country is that? It's not illegal anywhere I know of.

[deleted]

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#394
post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think quantiative easing added trillions of dollars during covid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing

When the government issues bonds, they sell them for commercial bank money, the same type of money in your bank account. When the central bank later buys those bonds from banks (they never buy them directly), something different happens: the bonds are exchanged for "bank reserves", a different type of digital money that only exists as numbers in the central bank's database. This "money" cannot be used to buy grocerie…

> A central bank implements quantitative easing by buying financial assets from commercial banks and other financial institutions, thus raising the prices of those financial assets and lowering their yield, while simultaneously increasing the money supply.

Quantitative easing increases the money supply. They've injected trillions. Who got it is a separate question.

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#395

I have no idea what he is talking about. I use bitcoin to buy things both onchain and via lightning and the experience is so smooth and much much better than the circa 2017 period when fees were high. Don't keep it on exchange. The real thing that is stopping adoption is countries trying to classify it as a commodity and insist to pay capital gains on every microtransaction. Some countries are backwards (US, UK) than…

Could you give some use examples? As of 2018, Bitcoin still appeared to be basically useless as a day-to-day cash substitute: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/nyregion/new-york-today-l...

I guess it's not impossible that things have gotten better. But at least in my neighborhood and in the online merchants I frequent, Bitcoin adoption has declined. I think the last time I saw a Bitcoin logo on the street was August 2019.

I'd also be interested in statistics demonstrating that the consumer transaction volume is now nontrivial. Last I looked, M-Pesa had orders of more magnitude in use despite launching around the same time as Bitcoin.

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#396
post #339
post #3

>The scarcity of block chain space has led people to re-invent every last feature of the banks they thought they were going to be escaping. This is a pretty funny point because every time I go on twitter and see people talk about crypto, what they're essentially having is a discussion about public policy, and often they seem to try to reinvent institutions that already exist without even knowing it. From market-maker…

This isn't a very good criticism. Lots of new things recapitulate the structures they are replacing in many ways, while improving on them in just one or a few areas. The fact that ground is being retread is not itself a criticism or a sign of a lack of innovation. Yes, Bitcoin requires many of the same structures as traditional finance. That does not make them equivalent. Traditional finance does not allow you sovere…

It's not that the structures are inherently bad, it's that such structures are, philosophically, the exact sorts of things that many early (and current) proponents of crypto wanted to avoid. In that sense bitcoin hasn't failed as a system in & of itself, but it has failed to achieve the philosophical goals of those people.

Bitcoin & crypto also might not be sovereign in origin but they have plenty of sovereign influence, basically as much as any sovereignty wants to impose on it. Especially as entities like the SEC & IRS come to terms with it, it will be just as vulnerable to government control as fiat currency. This is especially the case because any wide-spread adoption will require adoption by large financial institutions, which cannot avoid regulatory regimes of their local jurisdictions. From the US government's standpoint, US citizens holding bitcoins is not much different than US citizens holding Euros. How that money enters into the US economy & interacts with US financial institutions or changes hands from person to person are basically subject to the same rules & regulations. If you're conducting a a transaction in excess of $10,000 then whatever mechanism facilitates that will still be subject to CTR's, and any "suspicious" transaction of lower limits will still be reported, by law, to the government.

Basically, if you want to convert bitcoin to the local currency to buy something, you'll need to use some sort of off-ramp that will be a regulatory bottleneck. Want to build a "shadow" economy purely driven by crypto exchange? Well, you'll still have to deal with the IRS knocking on your door & saying "You have things of value that you are performing work to receive. We don't care what currency or form you received them in, you received things of value. Give us our cut."

In short, it doesn't matter that it wasn't created by a sovereign authority: The control a sovereign authority can exert over it is, contrary to many of the most philosophical hopes for crypto, indistinguishable from sovereign currency in everything but name & source of origin.

Let me be clear though: I'm not anti-crypto. I'm probably a little ambivalent, and a little optimistic that it might replace high-friction mechanisms that exist in current financial infrastructure. What I do believe is that crypto cannot both go mainstream and fulfill the philosophical hopes that many had wanted for it.

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, Coinbase changed the other year, only for US citizens, where a passport is insufficient, you need to prove state residency (i.e. for most people, a driver's license). But one of my points here is that, while I'm sure some people here are chomping at the bit to nail me with a gleeful "see? ironic!", I simply don't have to use Coinbase. I can, for example, exchange Bitcoin locally the same way I can trade USD for…

Those analogies don't work for me. I already have "digital cash". The great bulk of the money I spend never takes physical form. And I use Linux because it's demonstrably superior for the tasks most important to me. Bitcoin, though, mainly seems to solve problems for speculators and people engaging in light financial crime. Is there a niche I'm missing?

>Bitcoin, though, mainly seems to solve problems for speculators and people engaging in light financial crime. Is there a niche I'm missing?

Do you have a source for that?

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#398

Related: the current rise of Bitcoin prices has been peculiar to me, and seems to be a bit of a canary in an inflationary coal mine. We've injected trillions of dollars of fiat into the economy this year. It feels like the sky-high valuations of technology companies and Bitcoin are "shock absorbers" of sorts, or early signals of inflation-yet-to-come. If we assume the market is efficiently pricing these assets (like…

I have been buying small amounts of bitcoin since around 2015. I have a very small portfolio, but growing?

Recently I have had friends that are very far from the tech scene, but well versed in investment risk pick up BTC as institutions announced the onboarding of coins.

I have no idea if $30k / btc is reasonable or insane, but I think we will know when bitcoin gets to the final price as the correlation to gold gets closer to 1.

Housing price is up, but not rent (all over US), that is driven by lower rates rather than inflation.

All that said, a ton of money was dumped on the market. We won't know until later in the year what the result of that is.

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#399
post #3

>The scarcity of block chain space has led people to re-invent every last feature of the banks they thought they were going to be escaping. This is a pretty funny point because every time I go on twitter and see people talk about crypto, what they're essentially having is a discussion about public policy, and often they seem to try to reinvent institutions that already exist without even knowing it. From market-maker…

I don't see the irony. The point is that Bitcoin has introduced an actual "digital cash" currency without institutional/governmental middlemen. That institutions can be built on top of that, and that some people want such institutions, doesn't change the novel utility of finally having a currency that functions like digital cash. It's like saying it's ironic that people use physical USD for anonymous p2p transactions…

Bitcoin isn't going to be a currency. It's a digital store of value. It will never be anything other than that. People may build new currencies on top of it in the near future. As the volatility fades from Bitcoin over time and it becomes extraordinarily boring (ie quite stable), some small nations will experiment with linking their fiat to Bitcoin for stability (seems laughable today, it won't be in a decade).

Re: Bitcoin is a disaster

#400

I agree with most of the points raised by the author but as a Venezuelan Bitcoin is a godsend. If you live abroad and want to send remittances to your friends and family it can be pretty easy in a normal country , with wire transfers,western union and so on. If your family lives in Venezuela your options are extremely more limited. These are some of the options Venezuelans have had to use: 1. Ask the money to be sent…

Personal experience: not only bitcoin was the only practical way I was able to receive funds in Russia from an Indonesian client, it was cheaper than just one leg of converting Indonesian currency (to USD).

Think of it. Buying bitcoin, sending and selling resulted being cheaper than just buying USD. The spread was that much lower. (It was in a relatively static price period in summer 2016)

And regular banks just didn't do such transactions between Russia and Indonesia, like, nope. And PayPal was somehow banning the client for some reason.

Post reply on HN