Why I have zero faith in crypto venture capitalists

Post by anonporridge » Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 5:03 PM UTC

IAmGraydon wrote: post #76

Everyone wants to talk about the future of crypto in terms of how it can be used. Not enough people are talking about the fact that a single breakthrough in computing could undo the encryption that these currencies are reliant upon, instantly driving the value to zero. This is a vulnerability that does not have an analogue in any other currencies, securities or stores of wealth. Because of that, crypto is and will be…

Post by jl2718 » Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 5:05 PM UTC

Post by steveBK123 » Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 5:06 PM UTC

klodolph wrote: post #52

wyck wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This opinion is really common, I used to have it but what changed my mind was realizing there are not really any "real world" use cases. I look at crypto as actual money, with the same definition: "money is a verifiable record that is generally accepted". Money in of itself does not have any "real world" use cases, money is money. Money facilitates economic velocity and growth in the same way crypto does, except cryp…

> Banks make money with money, they don't make money with real use cases. Banks make money with money + effort. They provide loans and vet the recipients of those loans, because the banks are exposed to the risk of default (at least, ideally, obviously this failed in 2008). If you want a small business loan, then you typically have to have not only a good credit rating, but a business plan. Sounds like a real use cas…

Post by imagineerschool » Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

short_sells_poo wrote: post #98

hanklazard wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed on the FDIC (although not everyone banks in the US) part but “speed” is not an area where traditional banks beat the right crypto solutions. My wife and I just had a major fiasco trying to transfer mortgage payments from one major bank to another. Our credit score was damaged severely. I’ll spare you the details but the diagnosis was eventually determined to be “not enough time for clearance” as in I need to h…

Are you being purposely disingenuous here? Perhaps crypto is an improvement over some archaic US banking standards but in the UK transactions will clear basically immediately and cost nothing. A money transfer is asymptotically just updating a couple of database records in a transaction. Execution speed is a technical problem, and one that is not solved efficiently by cryptos. Finally, most western countries offer an…

Post by crazygringo » Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 5:10 PM UTC

hanklazard wrote: post #91

crazygringo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> except crypto has the potential to be more efficient and secure Except that's not clear at all. It's currently less efficient than electronic bank ledgers by many orders of magnitude, in any way you measure -- energy consumption, cost, speed, etc. And it's paradoxically less secure, as tons of successful hacks/thefts have proven. If my bank gets hacked, I'm still FDIC-insured. The courts will make me whole. Crypto…

Agreed on the FDIC (although not everyone banks in the US) part but “speed” is not an area where traditional banks beat the right crypto solutions. My wife and I just had a major fiasco trying to transfer mortgage payments from one major bank to another. Our credit score was damaged severely. I’ll spare you the details but the diagnosis was eventually determined to be “not enough time for clearance” as in I need to h…